



iii;si;N"ii;i) \s\ 



A STUDY OF THE ROMANCE OF THE SEVEN SAGES 

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MIDDLE 

ENGLISH VERSIONS 




A DISSERTATION 

PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 

OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 

DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 



BY 

KILLIS CAMPBELL 

FORMERLY FELLOW IN ENGLISH AT THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 



BALTIMORE 

The Modern Language Association of America 
1898 






JOHN MURPHY & CO., PRINTERS, 
BALTIMORE. 



Gift 

Author 

^Person) 
MN 1/ 19J0 



[Reprinted from the Publications of the Modern Language Association 
of America, Vol. XIV, No. 1.] 



TABLE OF CONTENTS, 



PAGE. 

A Word of Introduction, 1 

I. The Earlier History of the Eomance, . - . - , 3 

I (a). The Eomance in the Orient, ----- 3 

I (6). Transmission of the Romance to the Occident, - - 12 

I (c). The Romance in France and Italy, - - - - 20 

1. The Dolopathos, ------- 21 

2. The Sept Sages de Borne, 24 

n. The Romance in England, 35 

II (a). The Middle English Versions, 37 

1. Description of the Manuscripts, - - - 37 

2. Interrelation of the Middle English Versions, 43 

3. Authorship of the Middle English Versions, - 84 

4. Source of the Middle English Versions, - - 87 
II (6). Sixteenth Century and Chap-book Versions, - - 91 

Appendix, 94 



A STUDY OF THE ROMANCE OF THE SEVEN 

SAGES WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO 

THE MIDDLE ENGLISH VERSIONS. 

A Word of Intboduction. 

The main object of thivS study has been to investigate 
thoroughly the relations of the Middle English versions of 
the Seven Sages of Rome. 

As preliminary to this investigation, a review of the history 
of the romance in the several stages through which it has 
passed before reaching English has been made. This survey, 
a recapitulation of the results which modern scholarship has 
attained in the study of the romance, has been made im- 
partially, and with a view to set forth the most approved 
views that have been held rather than to advance any new 
theories of my own. Where these views are conflicting, as is 
particularly the case with respect to the eastern versions, I 
have endeavored to sift truth from error, though here 
naturally some difficulty has been encountered. It is only 
on the question of transmission of the romance that a view 
differing from that of the best authorities has been taken. 

The chapter on the French and the Italian versions has been 
based in large part on the work of Gaston Paris, whose Deux 

1 



2 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Redactions has superseded all previous contributionSj repre- 
senting as it does the most recent and the best results that have 
been attained in this branch of the study of the romance. 
Additions which have been made consist largely in informa- 
tion as to a number of manuscripts which were unknown to 
Paris, or which have since been found. 

The second and major part of tlie study has been devoted 
to the Seven Sages in English. Here I have been preceded 
by Petras and Buchner, the one dealing mainly with the 
Middle English group, the other especially with the relations 
of the Wynkyn de Worde and Eolland versions. The 
dissertations of these two scholars are the only real contri- 
butions which have been made to the study of the English 
versions. It is therefore not surprising that many of the 
current theories with regard to these versions are shown on 
closer examination to be erroneous. The most far-reaching 
of these misconceptions is, I believe, that which regards the 
Wright version as independent/of* all other English versions. 
My investigations lead me to the conviction that at least seven 
of the eight Middle English manuscripts are related to each 
other through a common Middle English original. 

I regret that I have been forced to forego consideration of 
one of the Middle English versions, — the Asloan. I was 
denied access to this manuscript by its owner. Lord Talbot 
de Malahide, and learned of the existence of a transcript of it 
in the University Library at Edinburgh when it was too late 
to avail myself of it. Prof. Varnhagen believes it to have 
had an immediate basis on some Old French manuscript; 
there are reasonable grounds for doubting this belief, however, 
and I am unwilling to subscribe to it until a further comparison 
with the remaining Middle English versions has been made. 

This study leaves undone the most interesting, if not the 
most valuable part of the work I had planned, — a comparative 
study of the stories themselves ; for not even the stories of 
the Bidpai collection have enjoyed a wider vogue than those 
of the Seven Sages. The task of tracing these in their travels 



THE SEVEN SAGES. . 3 

aud of collecting their analogues will be attempted in a future 
publication, when it is hoped that an edition of one or more 
of the unpublished Middle English manuscripts may also be 
attempted. 

I. The Earlier History of the Romance. 

I (a). The Romance in the Orient, 

It is universally held to-day that the great collection of 
popular stories known in the West as the Seven Sages of Rome, 
in the East as the Book of Sindibdd, is of Indian origin. 
This was well established by Deslongchamps already in 1838, 
in his Essai sur les Fables Indiennes,^ and has never since been 
seriously brought in question. The Indian original, however, 
has not yet been discovered, nor is it probable that it ever will 
be; and it even admits of very considerable doubt whether 
the romance ever existed in India in a form very near to that 
in which it is first found. 

All attempts, too, to show a kinship between the romance 
and some surviving Sanskrit story have proved in large part 
futile. Benfey first pointed out the analogy between the 
introduction to the Pantchatantra and the framework of 
the Sindibdd,^ but he very justly concluded that the Pantcha- 
tantra was indebted to the Sindibdd rather than the Sindibdd 
to the Pantchatantra. In a later publication,^ he called atten- 
tion to the similarity between the Sindibdd and the legend 
of Kunala and Asoka, and Cassel has boldly assumed this 
legend to be the ultimate basis of the romance."* 

The story of Kunala is widely known in Sanskrit litera- 
ture. Asoka, a famous Indian king, had, after the death of 
his first wife, married one of the latter's attendants. The 

^ Published at Paris, 1838, in conjunction with Leroux de Lincy's edi- 
tion of the Sept Sages de Borne. 
'■'Pantchatantra, Leipzig, 1859, i, ^ 8 ; also Melanges AsiaL, in, p. 188 f. 
3 Orient and Occident, rii, p. 177 f. 
^Mischle Sindbad, Berlin, 1888, pp. 10 f., 62. 



4 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

new queen had been rejected previous to this by Kunala, 
the son of Asoka by another wife, and bore in consequence the 
greatest hatred toward him. The prince is sent by Asoka to 
one of the provinces to put down a rebellion, where he wins 
great distinction for himself. In the meantime the king is 
stricken with a fatal disease, and determines to recall the 
young prince and place him on the throne. The queen, 
realizing what this would mean to her, offers to cure the king 
provided he grant her one favor. Having been restored to 
health through her agency, the king agrees to grant her what- 
ever she may desire. She asks to be permitted to exercise 
supreme authority for seven days, during which time, at her 
instigation, the prince's beautiful eyes ^ are put out. Kunala 
subsequently presents himself before his father in the guise 
of a lute-player, and is recognized. The queen is burned in 
expiation of her crime.^ 

Such in brief outline is the legend, which, if it is indeed 
the ultimate origin of the Sindibdd, at least does not suggest 
an obvious relation to it. 

Abundant proof of a Sanskrit origin of the Sindibdd, how- 
ever, is had in the nature or content of its stories and, in 
particular, of its framework, which is distinctly Buddhistic. 
Cassel has treated this aspect of the problem at great length.^ 
He would concede as the result of his investigations that some 
of the many varying stories were not found in the hypotheti- 
cal original, and that no one of the extant versions faithfully 
represents this original. ISTor is it strange that this should be 
the case, for it would be a very miracle had the collection 
remained intact throughout a possible half-dozen redactions. 
It is, accordingly, impossible to determine which of the stories 
were in the original, or which not ; this, for the present at 
least, must remain largely a matter of conjecture. Still, this 

1 Cf. Mischle Sindbad, p. 10. 

' For further details of this legend, see Burnouf, Introduction cl rhistoire 
du Buddhisvme indicfn, Paris, 1844, pp. 144 f., 406. 
'^Mischle Sindbad, p. 82 f. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 6 

much may be accepted as established, that some of the original 
stories, the ethical purpose, and many of the general charac- 
teristics of the Indian prototype have been preserved. 

The Eastern group comprises a Hebrew, a Syriac, a Greek, 
an Old Spanish, two closely related and a third somewhat 
anomalous Persian, and three cognate Arabic versions. All 
these differ more or less from each other, but, as compared 
with the Western group, with which they have in common 
only four stories and the framework, they distinctly stand 
apart and make up a separate group. There are many 
important details in which the two groups differ, but the 
most marked features which characterize the Eastern group 
are, first, that each sage tells two tales as against one each in 
the western versions^ — a feature which was probably not 
in the Sanskrit original; and, secondly, in contradistinction to 
the entire western group with the exception of the DolopathoSy 
that the prince has only one instructor, the philosopher Sindi- 
bad. This illustrious teacher is the central figure of all 
versions in the East, where by general consent the romance 
is called after him the Book of Sindibdd.'^ 

The origin of the name Sindibdd is in dispute. Benfey 
traces it back to "^Siddhapati,^ Teza to "^Siddhapcda ; ^ Cassel, 
on the contrary, holds that the word was coined first after 
leaving India, and is neither Siddhapatl nor Siddhapcda, but 
"^Sindubadhjdja = Indian teacher.^ 

The name of the prince has not been preserved, but the 
king is named in each one of the representative eastern texts. 
In the Syriac and the Greek he is called Kums; in the Old 

' This is the case in all eastern versions save the Seven Vezirs and the 
version of Nachshebi : in the former some sages tell one, some two stories ; 
in the latter each sage tells only one. 

^Prof. Khys Davids in his work on the Jdiakas {Buddhist Birth Stories, 
Boston. 1880, vol. i, pp. xli, xciv) seems to have confounded this romance 
with the story of Sinbad the Sailor of the Arabian Nights. The two are in 
no way related. 

^ Pantchatantra, I, § 5 (p. 23). 

*It Libro dei Sette Savj, ed. D'Ancona, Pisa, 1864, p. xlyii. 

^ Mischle Sindbad, p. 6Q. 



6 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Spanish, Alcos, which may be considered a variant of Kurus 
{Al-Carus), since the Spanish holds very closely with the 
Greek and Syriac, and goes back to the same original. The 
Hebrew version, on the other hand, calls the king Pai Pur, 
or, as Benfey has suggested, Kai (king) Pur^ and Cassel 
would identify this Pur with the Indian king Porus, ruler 
of India at the time of the Alexandrian invasion, and third 
before King Asoka of the Kunala story. Porus, Cassel 
maintains, is a substitution for the less famous Asoka of the 
original — a transference of the Asoka tradition to Porus.^ 
The Kurus of the Greek and Syriac he would explain in like 
manner as a similar transference, after leaving India, from 
Porus, or Asoka, to the far-famed Cyrus of the Persians.^ 

The route of transmission from India westward is very 
generally assumed to have been through Pahlavi into Arabic.^ 
There seems to be little evidence, however, of the existence of 
a Pahlavi version, unless the current tradition to that effect, 
or the fact that the Kalila wa Dimna had such an inter- 
mediate stage, be regarded as such. Hence Cassel takes a 
radically different view from that generally held, maintaining 
that the lost Arabic text goes back not to a Pahlavi but to 
a Syriac version, which, in its turn, goes back to the San- 
skrit, — the collection, then, having been transmitted westward 
through the agency of the Manicheans in the third or fourth 
century of our era.^ The Hebrew and the lost Arabic versions 
he conceives to be coordinate redactions of this early Syriac 
version, finding support of this theory, so far as it concerns 
the Hebrew text, in the Syriac influence which the language 
of the latter exhibits. At the same time, although he thus 
claims for the Hebrew version the greatest antiquity of any 
text wliich has been preserved, Cassel admits that, in addition 
to the Syriac influence, the Hebrew text also contains traces 
of a Greek influence (as, for instance, in the names of the 

' Ibid., pp. G3, 212. 2 iii^^ p 6 1 , 

' So Coiiiparetti, Noldeke, Clouston, and others. 
*Mwchle Sindbad, j)p. 61, 310. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 7 

sages)/ which is of itself sufficiently indicative of the lack of 
conclusive proof of his thesis.^ 

The Arabic text, unlike the early Syriac, is in no way 
hypothetical, but the evidence that it once existed, even as 
late as the thirteenth century/ is conclusive. Its influence 
has been very wide, and, until Cassel, it has been generally 
assumed to be the source, either mediate or immediate, of the 
entire Eastern group. The Syriac Sindban and the Old 
Spanish version are believed to be its closest representatives. 
Its author, according to the testimony of the introduction to 
the Syntipas, was a certain Musa, and its date has been con- 
jectu rally placed by Noldeke * and others in the eighth century. 

Only ten versions belonging to the Eastern type have sur- 
vived. These are the Hebrew Mischle Sindbad, the Syriac 
Sindbarij the Greek Syntipas, the Persian Sindibdd-ndmeh and 
its source, the text of As-Samarquandi, the Old Spanish Libido 
de los JEngannos, the three Arabic versions of the Seven Vezirs, 
and the eighth night of the Tuti-ndmeh of Nachshebi.^ 

The relative age of these is not definitely known. Early 
scholars as a rule held that the Hebrew version antedated all 
others ; but this view was summarily rejected by Comparetti ^ 
and his followers, who claimed greatest antiquity for the 
Syntipas, a distinction of which it was robbed by Rodiger's 
discovery of the Syriac version. The Nachshebi version has 
also been held to be the oldest,^ and Clouston in recent years 

^ These are, according to Cassel (p. 219 f.), Sindibad, Hippocrates, Apu- 
leius, Lucian, Aristotle, Pindar, and Homer. 

"Mischle Sindbad, pp. 222, 310. 

^The Old Spanish version was made from it in 1253. 

*In his review of Baethgen's edition of the Sindban in Zeitschrift d. d. 
Morg. Gesellschaft, xxxiii, p. 518. 

^All these, with the exception of the text of As-Samarquandi, have been 
rendered accessible either in the original or in translations, and in most 
cases in both. 

*^ Comparetti, Book of Sindibad, p. 53 f. Citation is made from the English 
translation by Coote, for the Folk Lore Socy., London, 1882. The original 
Ricerche appeared at Milan in 1869. 

^ Brockhaus for example. 



8 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

has contended for the Sindihad-ndmeh as representing most 
closely the hypothetical original.^ The result of the latest 
investigation, as has been seen, is to return to the view of 
early scholars, which gives to the Hebrew text first place both 
as regards date and fidelity to the lost original. Such is 
CassePs conclusion, which, although somewhat revolutionary, 
is arrived at by argument which at least serves to invalidate 
Comparetti's assumption that the Hebrew text stands for a 
late and very free version of the romance. It is hardly legiti- 
mate to conclude, from the circumstance that the Mischle 
Sindbad stands apart from the remaining members of the 
Eastern group, that it is, on that account, less faithful to 
the original tradition. Nor is Comparetti's argument for the 
identification of the Joel to whom the work is attributed by 
Rossi and the British Museum manuscript, with the Joel 
who is reported to have translated the Kalila wa Dimna into 
Hebrew, and the consequent establishment of a thirteenth 
century date for this version, any more valid.^ At the same 
time, it is to be regretted that Cassel has attained no definite 
results as to chronology.^ 

The Mischle Sindbad*^ contains twenty stories, three of 
which, Absalom, The Disguised Youth, and The Humpbacks 
(amatores), appear in no other version of the Eastern group. 
Its first three stories come in the same order as in the Syriac, 
Greek, and Old Spanish versions. Other agreements which 
are evident on reference to a comparative table serve appar- 
ently to hold these four texts together ; ^ this, however, is 
probably rather due to a more faithful preservation of the 

' Clouston, Book of Sindibdd [Glasgow], 1884, p. L f. 

" Comparetti, Book of Sindibdd, p. 53 f. 'Mischle Sindbad, p. 310. 

■•The Hebrew text has undergone the following editions: Sengelman 
(with German translation), Halle, 1842 ; Carmoly (with French transla- 
tion), Paris, 1849 ; and Cassel (German translation and copious notes), 
Berlin, 1888. 

* For the most complete comparative table, see Landau, Quellen des De.ka- 
meron, 2d ed., Stuttgart, 1884; see also Cassel, p. 362 f., and Comparetti, 
p. 25. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. V 

ultimate original on the part of these than to any very close 
relationship with the Hebrew, and comparison will show not 
only that these three have much in common which does 
not appear in the Hebrew, but also that the latter has many 
features (the naming of the sages, for example) which are 
peculiarly its own. Additional importance attaches to the 
Hebrew text from the fact that it probably bears a closer 
relation to the Western group than any other known eastern 
version.^ 

The Syriac Sindban was discovered by Rodiger in 1866, 
and was published with a German translation by Baethgen in 
1879.^ The text is unfortunately fragmentary, especially at 
the end. Although at first doubted by Comparetti, it has 
been satisfactorily shown by Noldeke to be the Syriac basis 
of the Syntipas, alluded to in the prologue of the latter.^ The 
immediate ( riginal of the Sindban must then be the last 
Arabic text of Musa. Noldeke believes it to belong to the 
tenth century. 

The Greek Syntipas is, in interest and importance, second 
only to the Hebrew text. As compared with its Syriac origi- 
nal, it is much more full and ornate, — an almost unfailing 
characteristic of a later text. Its author was, as the prologue 
establishes, a certain Michael Andreopulos and the translation 
was made at the command of one Gabriel fieXdovv/u^o^;. Com- 
paretti would identify this Gabriel with Duke Gabriel of 
Melitene, and thus establish the date of the work as the 
second half of the eleventh century;^ but this, while a gain 
in a measure, is little more than a happy suggestion. Far 
less probability has Cassel's proposition that the reference is 
to the angel Gabriel.'^ The text was first published by 

^See the next chapter on "The Transmission of the Romance to the 
Occident." 

* Baethgen, Sindban, oder die Sieben Weisen Meister, Leipzig, 1879. An 
English translation by H. Gollancz appeared in Folk Lore, \^II, p. 99 f., 
June, 1897. 

3 Zeitschr. d. d. Morg. Gesellschaft, xxxiii, p. 513 f. 

■* Book of Sindibdd, p. 57. * Mischle Sindbad, p. 368. 



10 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Boissonade, and has been lately critically edited by Eberhard.^ 
A modern Greek adaptation of the older text is of little value 
in a comparative study of the romance.^ 

The Libro de los EngannoSy like the Syriac text, was not 
known until late in the century. • It is, according to its pro- 
logue, a translation from the Arabic, made in the year 1253. 
The text is complete, but very corrupt. Its closest affinities 
are with the Greek and Syriac versions, with both of which it 
exhibits intimate agreement in content and order of stories. It 
seems to have had no influence at all on modern Spanish litera- 
ture. The first edition of the text appeared in Comparetti's 
Ricerche/m 1869; a second edition, with an admirable Eng- 
lish translation appended, appeared in the English edition of 
this book in 1882.^ 

The Persian Sindibdd-ndmeh^ dates from the year 1375. 
It purports to be based on a Persian prose text which goes 
back to the Arabic. Clouston first suggested that this origi- 
nal was the text of As-Samarquandi, which was known in the 
early part of the century, but which had subsequently been 
lost sight of. By the rediscovery of a manuscript of this 
version in 1891, he has been enabled to establish this conjec- 
ture as a fact.^ The As-Samarquandi text agrees closely with 
the Sindibdd-ndmeh in content, the only important diff'erence 
being the substitution on the part of the latter of one or two 
extraneous stories for those it found in its original. The 
agreement in order of stories is close throughout. The date 
of the prose text falls late in the twelfth century. It differs 
considerably from the rest of the Eastern group, but is nearer 

^ Eherhard, Fab^dae Romanenses Greece, etc., i (Teubner), Leipzig, 1872. 

'^ For the Syntipas in later literature, see Murko, " Die Geschichte v. d. 
Sieben Weisen b. d. Slaven," Wiener AkaA. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. CL, cxxil, 
No. X, p. 4 f. 

^Book of Sindibild, pp. 73-164. 

"^This text has not yet been edited. An abstract of it was given by 
Falconer in the Asuiiic Journal, xxxv, p. 169 f. and xxxvi, pp. 4 f., 99 f. ; 
a complete translation into English appears in Clouston's Book of Slndibdd. 

^Athenaeum for Sept. 12, 1891, p. 355. 



\ 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 11 

to the Syriac, Greek and Spanish versions than to the Hebrew. 
There appears to be no evidence to support Clouston's sugges- 
tion that it represents the Sanskrit prototype more faithfully 
than any other known version ; neither is Modi's contention 
for a close relation with the story of Kaus, Sonddbeh, and 
Sidvash^ by any means convincing; but the tradition which 
makes its origin in the Arabic text is doubtless well founded. 

Under the head of the Seven Vezirs fall three versions which 
have been introduced into the frame of the Arabian Nights. 
These are the texts of Habicht and Scott, and the Boulaq 
edition.^ They are of late composition, and of comparatively 
slight value for the present purpose. 

The text contained in the eighth night of Nachshebi^ is 
one of the most interesting of the Eastern group, and has 
given rise to much speculation. It differs considerably from 
all other related versions, having but six stories, only five 
of which appear elsewhere in the Eastern group. All five of 
these in the fuller versions are second vezir's tales, and as 
they were also found originally in the Sukasaptail (though 
not connected as with Nachshebi), it has been conjectured by 
Comparetti that they were first introduced into the Sindibdd 
after leaving India, and that Nachshebi, observing this, again 
inserted them in his free translation of the Tidi-ndmeh, and 
practically in the same form in which he found them in the 
Sindibdd^ Comparetti would further identify the collection 
before and after this addition with the ' Greater' and 'Lesser' 
Sindibdd referred to by the tenth century Mohammed Ibn el 
Warrak. A radically different theory has been advanced by 
Noldeke, who maintains that the ' Greater ' Sindibdd has been 
lost.^ As for the version of the Sindibdd whence Nachshebi 

' Modi, Dante and Viraf and Gardis and Kaus, Bombay, 1892. 

''lOOl Nights, Breslau, 1840, xv, pp. 102-172; Scott, Tales, Anecdotes and 
Letters, Shrewsbury, 1800, p. 38 f. ; 1001 Nights, Boulaq, 1863, iii, pp. 75-124. 

^Brockhaus, NachshebVs S. W. M., Leipzig, 1845; translated by Teza, 
D'Ancona ed. of Sette Savj., p. xxxvii f. 

< Book of Sindibdd, p. 37 f. 

* Zeitschr. d. d. Morg. Gesellschafl, xxxiii, p. 521 f. 



12 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

drew, both Comparetti and Noldeke concur in the belief that 
it was the text on which the Sindibdd-ndmeh was based, or 
that of As-Samarquandi. The date of the Nachshebi version 
is late, as its author died in 1329. 

Besides the ten versions catalogued above, the existence of 
certain others which have been lost is proved by sundry refer- 
ences from oriental writers. A Persian text is attributed to 
Azraki by Daulat Shah, and there are several references from 
the ninth and tenth centuries to works which do not seem to 
be identical with anything which has been preserved. The 
best-known of these, probably, is Masudi's (943) statement 
that in the reign of Kurush '^ lived es-Sondbad, who is the 
author of the book of the seven vezirs, the teacher and boy, 
and the wife of the king. This is the book which bears the 
name Kitdb-es-Slndbdd.^' ^ A still earlier reference is that of 
Al-Yaqubi (880). Both of these may refer to the Arabic 
text of Musa, though this is by no means certain. Most 
perplexing of all is the reference, already mentioned, to a 
* Greater ' and a ^ Lesser ' Book of Sindibdd. 

Doubtless many more versions have been lost than this 
would indicate ; but since nearly a third of the known texts 
have been revealed only within the last generation, it may be 
hoped that the near future has in store many revelations 
w^hich will materially serve to dispel the mist which now 
surrounds almost the entire question of relations in the East. 

I (6). Ti^ansmission of the Romance to the Occident. 

The Greek Syntipas and the Old Spanish Libro de los 
Engannos are the only representatives of the Eastern group 
which have arisen on European territory. Neither one of 
these, however, can be considered a connecting link in the 
chain of transmission ; nor can, in fact, with all certainty, 
any one member of the Eastern group claim this distinction. 

^ Masudl, Meadoius of Gold, translated by Sprenger, London, 1841, p. 175. 
Masudi was not well acquainted with the romance, as follows from the fact 
that he attributes its authorship to Sindibfid. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 13 

The question of transmission is, and must doubtless always 
remain, very much shrouded in darkness. The two groups, 
having in common only four stories and the framework, and 
having in these, also, many radical differences, cannot be 
thought of as connected through free or literal translation, 
nor by intermediate redactions ; the only valid explanation 
of the enormous gap existing between them must repose in 
the assumption of a basis for the western original in popular 
tradition. This alone can explain the difference between the 
two groups. 

But this assumption should not carry with it (as with 
Comparetti apparently; I. c, p. 2) the further assumption 
that, since the medium of transmission was oral, all possi- 
bility of ever determining the specific original of the Western 
group is thereby done away with. This need not follow at 
all. The oral tradition on which the western parent version 
had its basis, must itself have had some basis, and this cannot 
have been the entire Eastern group, nor with any degree of 
probability any two of its members ; it was some one member 
of the Eastern group. Accordingly it is legitimate to endeavor 
to determine which one of the Eastern versions is the origi- 
nal, or the closest representative of the original, of the Western 
group. 

Modern scholars in general have refrained from any investi- 
gation of this stage of the history of the romance. With a 
single exception, the only judgments upon the problem date 
from the earlier part of the century. Dacier, Keller, Deslong- 
champs, Wright, D'Ancona, and others put forth claims for one 
or another of the Eastern group (some for the Greek, others 
for the Hebrew), as the original of the western type. But 
all these claims were unsustained by any evidence adduced, 
and were in every case scarcely more than conjectures. The 
modern scholar who alone has put himself on record here is 
Landau;^ and he is, at the same time the only one of the 

^Marcus Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, 2d ed., Stuttgart, 1884. 



14 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

whole number who has made a serious effort to sustain his 
position. At the basis of Landau's work, however, lies the 
assumption that the Latin prose Hlstoria Septem Sapientum 
(H) is the parent version of the Western group, — an assump- 
tion which is entirely gratuitous, for surely Gaston Paris has 
succeeded in demonstrating that H is not the original western 
text; while the majority of Landau's arguments therefore hold 
also in a comparison of the oldest texts with the Eastern 
group, it is in view of this fundamental misconception on his 
part that he has in reality proyed nothing more than that the 
fourteenth century Hlstoria is nearer the Hebrew than to any 
other eastern version. 

With the proof of the unoriginality of H, the question 
as to the nearness of the various sub-types of the western 
group to the parent version has been left open. The oldest 
text preserved is the Dolopathos ; but this is a unique version, 
and, as will be shown in the next chapter, cannot with the 
slightest probability be looked upon as the western original, 
though it is assuredly connected in some way with the pre- 
vailing type of the Western group, the Seven Sages of Rome. 
Next to the Dolopathos the Scala Coeli (S) and Keller (K) 
texts have been treated as the oldest by the latest and best 
authorities ; to these, in view of its prime importance and the 
uncertainty as to its relations, we should like to add the type 
A"^} No proof of the priority of any one of these has yet been 
brought forward ; moreover, the earliest dating proposed for 
any of them is the first half of the thirteenth century. We 
may begin, then, with the assumption that the immediate 
parent version of the Western group has been lost. At the 
same time, since the Dolopathos, which dates from the last 
quarter of the twelfth century, is evidently based on some 
version of the prevailing western type, we may assume for 

^The Old French versions A, C, D of Paris {Deux Redactions) have been 
"starred" throughout in order to avoid confusion with the Middle English 
(M. E.) versions J, C, D. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 15 

this lost original a date not later than the middle of the 
twelfth century. 

A twelfth century original having been assumed for the 
Western group, the Libro de los Engannos (xiii cent.), the 
Sindibdd-ndmeh (xiv cent.), and the Seven Vezirs (very late) 
may be eliminated from the investigation ; likewise the unique 
text of Nachshebi for reasons that are obvious. There remain 
the Mischle Sindbad, the Sindban, and the Syntipas, no one 
of which can be dated later than the eleventh century, if 
we accept CassePs view as to the comparative antiquity of 
the Hebrew text. Further, since the western original of the 
Western group has been lost, comparison can be made with 
the latter only on the basis of the constant elements appearing 
in its most ancient versions, — S, K, ^.* Accordingly, the 
comparison must be instituted between the Hebrew, Syriac, 
and Greek versions, on the one hand, and 8, K, A"^ on the 
other. 

The framework of the romance has undergone a radical 
change in the course of its transmission westward. There is 
no longer mention of a philosopher Siudibad, but the seven 
sages of Rome become the central figures, and play the double 
r6le of instructors and defenders of the prince. Sundry other 
characteristic features of the Eastern group, such as the prince's 
early stupidity, the multiplicity of the king's wives, etc., have 
been lost ; but the most far-reaching change consists in the 
curtailment of stories, each sage telling only one story in 
the Western group as against the prevailing number of two 
in the Eastern. 

In these variations the Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac versions 
present essential agreement ; but there are several features in 
which these three texts do not agree, and it is significant here 
that where the Western group preserves any of these features, 
it is always in agreement with the Hebrew, and in no single 
instance with the Greek or the Syriac. 



16 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

The following features peculiar to the Hebrew text as 
compared with the rest of the Eastern group reappear in the 
oldest western versions : ^ 

(1). The seven sages are not referred to simply as such, 
but are mentioned hy name^ (Landau, p. 48). 

(2). They vie in their efforts to secure the office of instructor 
of the prince ^ (Landau, p. 48). 

(3). These sages, and not the vezirs or counsellors of the 
king as with the rest of the Eastern group, relate the stories 
which preserve the prince's life^ (Landau, p. 48). 

The mode of punishment of the guilty queen offers nothing 
determining. The eastern texts have little in common here 

'All these several bits of argument adduced here and on the following 
pages, with the exception of those under the story avis, have been advanced 
by Landau (pp. 47-50) ; in addition to these, owing to his false hypothesis 
of the originality of if, Landau has made use of two other features in which 
H agrees with the Hebrew text versus the remainder of the Eastern group, 
but which must be cancelled, since they are also peculiar to H. These are 
(1) the disguised-youth incident of H, which Landau (p. 48 f.) inclines to trace 
back to the seventeenth story of the Mischle Sindbad, and (2) amatores, the 
twelfth story of the Historia, which is ultimately the same as the Hebrew 
story of the Hunchbacks {M. S. 18 ; see Bedier, Les Fabliaux, Paris, 1893, p. 
201 f.). Neither of these appears in any other western version, whence 
the only legitimate inference that they were not in the lost western original, 
but are late incorporations on the part of ifinto the frame of the collection, 

■■^This, a characteristic feature of the Western group, appears in all 
western texts save those (as S) which have been abridged. The names 
of the sages in the Mischle Sindbad are Sindibad, Hippocrates, Apuleius, 
Lucian, Aristotle, Pindar, and Homer (Cassel, p. 253); in the Western 
group, Bancillas, Ancilles, Malquidras, Lentulus, Caton, Jesse, and Meros. 
For variants of these, see Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, p, 60 n. 

'^In the Hebrew (see Cassel, p. 255 f.) one proposes to instruct him in 
five years, another in two years, a third in one year, — and finally Sindibild 
offers to make him wisest of all men in six mouths. The term of years 
proposed by the sages in the western versions varies from seven to one. 

*Carmoly (p. 65) states expressly that these were the king's counsellors, 
and not the sages, who, he says, were now in hiding to avoid the king's 
anger; but, as Landau (p. 48) points out, the sage Aristotle is referred to 
by name at the end of the third story as having saved the prince's life by 
his stories on the preceding day (Cassel, p. 267); accordingly, although 
there is a slight confusion, it is evident that Carmoly is in error. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 17 

beyond the bare outline. In the Greek and As-Samarquandi 
texts, the woman is condemned to wander through the streets 
on an ass, with her head shaved and her face soiled, and with 
two criers proclaiming her shame. In the Hebrew text, she 
is, at the prince's request, pardoned unconditionally. The 
Syriac text is fragmentary here. Of the western feature of 
condemning the queen to die the death prepared for the 
prince, there seems to be no hint in the eastern versions. 

A comparison of the four stories (canis, apeVy avis, and 
senescalcus) common to the two main groups also shows many 
variations, but here, too, where the Mischle Sindbad differs 
from the Syyitipccs and other versions of the Eastern group, it 
will be seen to accord in several particulars with the Western 
group. 

(1). Canis. The story canis, the only one found in all 
versions of the Seven Sages, both eastern and western, exhibits 
in the earliest western versions no noteworthy variations from 
the prevailing type of the story in the East. In the Sindibdd- 
ndmeh it is a weasel or ichneumon which attacks the sleeping 
child ; in all other versions it is a snake. The child is left in 
charge of nurses in the western versions, a feature entirely 
foreign to the Eastern group. The derivative types, Dolo- 
pathos and Historia, introduce a bird {Dolop., a goshawk; 
H, a falcon) which wakes the child on the snake's approach. 
This and several other additions, especially to the Dolopathos, 
are not found in the .types 'S', K, and ^*, a circumstance which 
well warrants the inference that they were not in the western 
parent version. 

(2). Aper. This story, like canis, has been subjected to 
considerable alteration in the course of transmission, — e. g., in 
the East, the boar comes to his death as the result of holding 
up his head in the expectation of more fruit (the sinews drying 
up) ; in the West, he is slain by the shepherd, who, descending 
the tree until in reach of him, " claws " him on the back until 
he falls asleep, and then dispatches him with his knife. But 
2 



18 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

the special value in the collation of this story lies in the fact 
that the Hebrew text coincides with the Western group in 
having a man chased up the tree, while in the remaining eastern 
versions it is a monkey who thus flees from the boar. This 
coincidence, first noted by Deslongchamps (/. c, p. 110 n.), 
is one of the most striking agreements of the Hebrew text with 
the Western group. 

(3). Senescalcus. A comparison of the various versions of 
senescalcus reveals no eastern motive reproduced in the West 
which is not common to the entire Eastern group. The 
western version of the story agrees in general outline with 
the eastern, but is distinguished from it by the introduction 
of even more objectionable details than those which characterize 
its oriental original. The western texts vary in the method 
of punishing the seneschal : in /S' he is hanged ; in Kj A"^, 
and the prevailing sub-groups, he is banished by the king on 
pain of death in case he return. In the East the bathman 
(= seneschal) dies by his own hand. 

(4). Avis. The essential features of this famous story have 
been preserved remarkably intact thoughout all versions. 
There are, however, two features which occur in the East 
only in the Mischle Sindbad which have been preserved in 
the western texts. These are (1) that the wife goes on the 
house-top in order to sprinkle water over the bird's cage, and 
(2) that she is aided and abetted in her efforts to deceive the 
bird by her maid. Of the first of these we have in no other 
eastern version any hint ; likewise, for the second, there is no 
real suggestion in any of the Eastern group besides the Mischle 
Sindbadj for, although there is mention elsewhere of the maid, 
it is only as having been suspected of informing on her mis- 
tress, and never in the r6le assigned her in the Hebrew and 
the western versions.^ 

^ The arguments made by Landau under avis are not valid. That the 
bird speaks Hebrew as well as Latin, is not true of any of the oldest 
western versions, but appears to be peculiar to 11; while the argument 
from the killing of the bird in H and the Hebrew text is altogether in- 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 19 

To recapitulate then, the features peculiar to the Hebrew 
and the oldest western texts are as follows : 

(1). The seven sages are mentioned by name. 

(2). There is a rivalry between the sages in their efforts to 
secure the tutelage of the prince. 

(3). The sages, not the king's counsellors, defend the prince. 

(4). In aper^ the adventure happens not to an ape, but to a 
man. 

(5). In avis^ (a) the deception is practised on the bird 
through an opening in the house-top, and (b) the maid appears 
as an assistant of the faithless wife. 

A comparison with the Syntipas fails to bring out any 
feature exclusively common to it and the Western group. 
The same holds for the Syriac and later versions. The 
question is then narrowed down to the significance of the 
agreements between the Hebrew and the western texts. Are 
they only accidental, or have they a real significance ? Cer- 
tainly they do not prove a direct relationship between the 
Hebrew and any western version, as Deslongchamps and 
Landau have maintained ; nor are they sufficient to justify 
the thought of a connection of the Eastern and Western groups 
through intermediate literary stages; indeed, they yield no 
conclusive proof of anything with regard to the problem of 
relationship. Nevertheless, they are in a measure significant ; 
though some of them are in all probability accidental, yet it 
does not seem possible that all of them can be mere coinci- 
dences. They justify, at least, the negative conclusion that 
neither the Syntipas (nor the Sindban) was the eastern original 
whence sprang the tradition which culminated in the parent 
version of the Western group. And while they do not prove 
the Hebrew text to represent this eastern original, they 
do, nevertheless, establish this as a probability, with the 
only other alternative in the supposition that the eastern 
original of the Western group has been lost. 

valid, since the same feature is found in all eastern versions save the 
SyndpaSy and would be in any case of little value for the purpose to which 
Landau would put it, since it is a simple and natural variation. 



20 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



I (c). The Romance in France and Italy. 

Between the eastern and western types of the Seven Sages, 
as has been seen, there is a very wide difference. Four of the 
original stories and the main outline of the eastern framework 
have been preserved in the western versions, but, as Comparetti 
has aptly said, " there is no eastern version which differs so 
much from the others as the whole Western group differs from 
the Eastern, whether it be in the form of the fundamental 
story or in the tales which are inserted in it." In explanation 
of this wide difference a basis has been assumed for the Western 
group in oral accounts. 

Where these oral accounts first took literary form has not 
been, and probably never will be, satisfactorily determined. 
Some have maintained an origin on Latin territory ; but the 
probabilities favor a French origin, though it is more than 
possible that the parent version was written in the Latin 
language. 

The oldest form, apparently, under which the western type 
has come down to us is the DolopatJios. There can be little 
doubt, however, that the more widely known Sept Sages de 
Rome, of which there survive many manuscripts dating from 
a period but a little later than that of the earliest version of 
the DolopatJios J preserves more nearly the form and contents 
of the western parent version. And it is under this form that 
the romance has acquired its marvellous popularity in France, 
w^hence it has penetrated into nearly every other country of 
Europe. 

With regard to the relationship of these two forms or groups 
under which the romance appears in the West, early scholars 
were very much in error. For a long time it was believed 
that the poetical version of the Dolopathos found its source in 
the Latin prose Historia Septem Sapientum;^ again, it was 
always assumed as fundamental that the Historia antedated 

*The most widely known of all versions of our romance; see below. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 21 

and was the ultimate western original of the entire Western 
group, — these two misconceptions pervaded the entire litera- 
ture on the romance during the first half of this century. The 
error of the first was first shown by Montaiglon in 1856/ and 
its utter absurdity was conclusively proved a few years later 
by Oesterley^s discovery of the Dolopathos of Johannes, from 
which Herbert had made his poem.^ The second was current 
even until the appearance of Gaston Paris's Deux Ridactions^ 
in 1876, in which the comparatively recent date of the His- 
toria, and its immediate dependence on J.*, has been placed 
beyond question. 

1. The Dolopathos. — The Dolopathos exists in two versions, 
the Latin prose of Johannes de Alta Silva and the Old French 
poem of Herbert. The latter is preserved, so far as is known, 
in but three manuscripts ; ^ of the former, there are known, 
besides the original manuscript discovered by Oesterley, three 
late copies pointed out by Mussafia,^ an Innsbruck,^ and 



^ In the preface to his edition of the Herbert version : Li Romans de 
Dolopathos, ed. Brunet and Montaiglon, Paris, 1856. 

* Tiiis manuscript was discovered by Oesterley in 1873, and was published 
by him in the same year: Johannis de Alia Silva Dolopathos . . . ., Strasburg. 
See reviews by Paris, Romania, ii, p. 481 f. ; by Studemund, Z.f. d. A., xvii, 
p. 415 f. and xviii, p. 221 f. ; and by Kohler, Jahrb. /. ram. u. engl. Lit., 
XIII, p. 328 f. Several manuscripts discovered by Mussafia ( Wiener Akad. 
Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. CI., xlviii, p. 246 f., 1864) prior to this, and at first 
supposed to be original, were soon shown to be fifteenth century copies 
of the older manuscript. 

^Published in the Soc. d. Anc. Textesfr, for 1876. For the Historia, see 

pp. XXVIII-XLIII. 

* See Paris in Romania, ii, p. 503. A leaf of a fourteenth century MS. of 
the Herbert version has been lately acquired by the Bibliotheque Nationale 
— Nouv. Acq.fr. 934, No. 6 {Bulletin de la Soc. d. Anc. Textesfr., for 1896, p. 
71 f.). See also Haupt's Altd. Blatter, i, p. 119 f., for a German version of 
six stories of the Dolopathos. 

*See Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. CI., XLViii, p. 246 f. 
^Also brought to light by Oesterley. 

■^ Usually overlooked ; see Ward, Catalogue of Romances, London, 1893, ii, 
p. 228 f. 



22 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Johannes de Alta Silva, the author of the Latin original, 
was a Cistercian monk of the monastery of Haute Seille. His 
work bears the title Dolopathos, sive Opusculum de rege et 
septeni Sapientibus. It was dedicated to Bishop Bertrand of 
Metz, who had jurisdiction over the monastery of Haute Seille 
from 1184 (when it was transferred from the see of Toul to 
the see of Metz) to 1212, during which period, since Johannes 
would naturally dedicate to his own bishop, we may safely 
place the composition of his work. Paris favors a dating 
between 1207 and 1212 {Romania, ii, p. 501). 

The Old French poem of Herbert was made from the Latin 
prose text of Johannes toward the end of the first quarter of 
the thirteenth century (Montaiglon, 1223-1226 ; Paris, before 
1223). 

This type of the romance diiFers from all other western 
types in having only one instructor for the prince. For this 
reason it has been conjectured that it was founded on some 
oriental original, but there is no real evidence in support of 
this. In the suppression of the queen's stories, a feature in 
which it agrees w^ith the Nachshebi version, equally as little 
indication of an immediate eastern original is to be found. 

The Dolopathos has only one story (canis) in common wath 
the Eastern group, and inasmuch as this, together with three 
other of its stories (gaza, puteus, and inclusa), is also found in 
the Sept Sages de Rome, it is reasonably certain that the monk 
Johannes was acquainted with some version of the latter type.^ 
There is only one alternative supposition, viz. that both types 
grew up independently of each other and almost contempo- 
raneously, the one drawing only one story from the traditions 
brought from the East, while the other drew this and three 
others in addition, — with the further coincidence that both 
receive, as the result of like influence and environment, three 
stories {gaza, puteus, and inclusa) in common which were not 

^ See Comparetti to the contrary ; Vergil in the Middle Ages, translated by 
Benecke, London, 1895, p. 234 f. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 23 

in the eastern framework. That such was the case is, to say 
the least, very improbable. 

But, in any case, the prose Dolopathos was made not from 
written, but from oral sources. This is expressly stated by 
its author — who says he wrote non ut visa, sed ut audita — and 
is borne out by the introduction of the Lohengrin story, which 
appears here for the first time,^ as well as by the variations to 
which both framework and stories have been subjected. 

The poetical version of Herbert is based directly on the 
Latin prose version of Johannes. It contains many details 
and several important episodes which do not appear in the 
text discovered by Oesterley, chief among which additions are 
(1) the story inclusa, which has been fused with puteus in 
the poem, and (2) a very interesting episode with which gaza 
has been supplemented. Gaston Paris ^ thinks that these were 
contained in Herbert's original, which he believes to have 
been an enlarged copy of the first draft of the work as seen 
in the Oesterley manuscript ; but whether they are to be thus 
explained, or are to be attributed to the independence of the 
poet, has not yet been definitely settled. 

The Herbert version is very long, containing nearly 13,000 
lines. In both length and style it stands in striking contrast 
to the Keller metrical version of the Sept Sages de Borne (K),^ 
which, although it has nearly twice as many stories, has only 
5,060 lines. The Dolopathos has an introduction of about 
4,800 lines where J^ has but 68. 

The king in this branch of the Western group bears the 
name Dolopathos, and rules over the island of Sicily. The 
prince is called Lucinius. Before his birth it is predicted that 
he will become very wise, but will undergo many hardships, 
and will ultimately become a worshipper of the true God. 

^ See Todd, La Naissance du Chevalier au Cygne, Introduction, p. iii f., in 
Publications of the Mod. Lang. Assn. of America, vol. iv, 1889. See also Paris's 
review in Romania, xix, p. 314 f. 

^ Romania, ii, p. 500. 

^ See the dissertation of Ehret, Der Verfasser des Roman des Sept Sages und 
Herberz, Heidelberg, 1886. 



24 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

The prince's instruction begins when he has reached the age 
of seven. He is sent to Rome, and put under the care of the 
poet Vergil, whose figure is supreme throughout the romance, 
and gives to it one of its strongest claims upon our interest.^ 
The sages, who are, owing to VergiPs prominence, placed 
somewhat in the background, come up as in the other western 
versions, one each day and in a most mysterious fashion, — 
always just in time to save the prince's life. The prince 
relates no story at all, but Vergil tells the eighth and last. 
The order of stories is as follows : (1) canis {Bog and Snake) ^ 
(2) gaza {King^s Treasury), (3) senes {Best Friend), (4) creditor 
(the Pound of Flesh episode of the Merchant of Venice),^ (5) 
viduae films {Widow's Son), (6) latronis filius {Mastefi^- Thief) ^ 
(7) cygni eques (the fabled origin of Godfrey de Bouillon), (8) 
inclusa-puteus {Two D7'eams and Husband Shut Out).^ 

2. The Sept Sages de Rome. — The Sept Sages de Rome, in 
contradistinction to the Dolopafhos, comprises a very large 
number of more or less closely related versions. Probably 
one hundred manuscripts of its type are already known, and 
many others, we may be sure, remain to be revealed by further 
research. The immediate source whence these have sprung 
has not come down to us. The date, too, of the parent ver- 
sion is uncertain, but, in view of its influence on the Dolopathos 
and the comparatively large number of thirteenth century ver- 
sions, it must be placed as early as 1 1 50, and it may fall in a 
time considerably anterior to this. 

The normal number of stories in this branch is fifteen ; of 
these the queen relates seven, the seven sages one each, and 

^ See Comparetti, Vergil in the Middle Ages, p. 232 f. 

'Ward, Catalogue of Romances, II, p. 122, makes the slight oversight of 
asserting that the casket-episode of the Merchant of Venice is also intro- 
duced into the Dolopathos. 

^ These stories have had a wide currency, and, in several instances, a 
most interesting history. For the fullest collections of analogues to them, 
see the editions of Montaiglon-Brunet and Oesterley, and the appendix to 
the latter's edition of the Oesta Romanorum. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 25 

the prince the fifteenth. The scene of action is prevailingly 
Rome, though in two instances — K and D — it is Constanti- 
nople.^ The emperor's name is Diocletian.^ 

The interrelation of the various sub-types into which the 
Sept Sages falls has been the subject of almost continuous 
investigation for more than half a century. The first serious 
attempt at an orderly classification was made by Goedeke in 
1866 {Chnent und Occident, iii, p. 402 f.). He was followed 
two years later by Mussafia,^ in a study which possesses great 
merit, and which served very much to clear the way for sub- 
sequent investigation. But it is to Gaston Paris above all 
that credit is due here for bringing order out of chaos. The 
Preface to his Deux Redactions is by far the most significant 
contribution to the study of the Seven Sages which has yet 
been made, and leaves but the one regret that he has not 
extended his investigations so as to include the problems of 
the origin and propagation of the romance. It goes without 
saying that the excellence of Paris's work has been recognized 
on all sides, and that his conclusions have been almost uni- 
versally adopted. 

Paris classifies in five sub-groups, as follows : 

1. S. The Scala Coeli abridgment published by Goedeke. 

2. K. The well known metrical version of Keller. 

3. H. The very large group, of which the Historia is the 
type. 

4. /. The Versio Italica, 

5. French prose versions (other than iJ), including ^*, 
X, D* ( F), and M, 

1. S. The first of these, the text contained in the Scala 
Coeli J a compilation of the early fourteenth century by the 
Dominican Johannes Junior, is a Latin prose abridgment of a 
lost Liber de Septem Sapientibus. For the latter, Goedeke 

*This is only partly true of D ; see Paris, Deux Redactions, p. 1. 

* There are several exceptions to this: in iiT he is called Vespasian ; in 
D* Marcomeris, son of Priam (!); in if, Pontianus, — the name Diocletian 
being transferred to the prince. 

•' Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. CI., LVii, p. 37 f. 



ISO KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

(who has published the text according to the Scala Coeli in 
Orient u. Occident, iii, p. 402 f.) conjectures a date in the first 
half of the thirteenth century. An extract in the Summa 
Reoreatorum (xv cent.), which agrees very closely with S, has 
been pointed out by Mussafia {Wiener Akad» Sitzungsb., Ph. 
Hist. CI., LVii, p. 83 f ). 

S differs materially from H, and is almost as far from K 
and D*. It stands nearest to L, having in common with it 
the two stories Jilia and noverca in the place of Roma and 
inclusa of the remaining types. The agreement with D*, in 
that the queen is defended on the last day by a champion, is 
doubtless a mere coincidence (Paris, I. c, p. Yiii). Its only 
influence seems to have been that exercised on L. For 
Goedeke's claim that it is the closest extant representative 
of the western original no sustaining argument has yet been 
brought forward.^ 

2. H. The type of the second group is the well-known 
Historia Septem Sapientum Romae. Buchner^ enumerates six- 
teen manuscripts in which the Historia has been preserved. 
Its first edition appeared at Cologne in 1472, and the bibli- 
ographers report many of subsequent date. The latest edi- 
tion, and only nineteenth century reprint, is that of Buchner.^ 
An Old French translation, printed at Geneva in 1492, has 
recently been republished by Paris as the second text of 
his Deux Redactions (pp. 55-205). The Historia Calmnnia 
Novercali (Antwerp, 1496) differs from it mainly in the 
omission of all Christian features. 

The Historia is by far the most widely known of all 
western versions, having had equally as great a vogue in 
some other European countries — Germany for instance — as in 
France. In English the Wynkyn de Worde text (to which 

' Ward, Calaloyue of Romances, ii, p. 200, erroneously states that Paris 
upholds Goedeke here. 

^ Erlancjer Beilrdxje zur enylischen Philologie, v, p. 1. Of these six were 
first pointed out by Paris, /. c, p. xxxix,— eight by Varnhagen, Eine Ital. 
Prosaversion d. Sieben Weisen, p. XV. 

^Eiiany. Beitr., v, pp. 7-90. An Innsbruck MS. which dates from 1342. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 27 

the many English chap-book versions owe their origin), the 
Copland, and the Rolland versions found in it their ultimate 
original. With the Germans the Historia type is practically 
the only one which has found acceptance, and the number of 
versions, either in Latin or German, which are contained in 
their libraries is very large.^ It is under this form, also, that 
the romance has acquired its popularity in other Germanic 
and in the Slavonic languages.^ 

The history of opinion with regard to this type of the 
romance possesses much interest. Until quite recently, as has 
been seen, H was supposed to be the oldest member of the 
Western group. Goedeke, in 1866, was the first to break 
with this tradition, but without showing why. Paulin Paris 
followed in 1869, throwing the question open."^ Comparetti, 
also, in the same year, expressed the opinion that H was far 
from representing the western original.^ The matter w^as not 
satisfactorily cleared up until the appearance of Gaston Paris's 
book in 1876. The results of Paris's investigation {I. c, p. 
XXVIII f.) are to entirely dethrone H from the position which 
had been traditionally accorded it, and to establish for it a 
date in the first half of the fourteenth century, and an im- 
mediate basis on type J.*.** 

The distinguishing features of H, aside from its slight 
difference from^'^ in the order of stories, are the introduction 

^ For the first general discussion of the romance in Germany, see the 
preface to Keller's Li Eomans des Sept Sages, Tubingen, 1837. A more 
comprehensive discussion of the German versions accompanies his edition 
of the Hans von Biihel metrical version, Diodelianus Lehen (Quedlinburg, 
1841). 

' Keller enumerates versions, either in manuscript or in print, in Dutch, 
Welsh, Icelandic, Swedish, Danish, Polish, Hungarian, Russian, and Arme- 
nian ; see the prefaces to his two editions cited above. See, also, Murko, 
"Die Geschichte v. d. Sieben Weisen b. d. Slaven" in Wiener Akad. Sit- 
zungsb., Ph. Hist. CI., cxxii, 1890, and " Beitr. zur Textgesch. d. H. S. S." 
in Zeitschr.f. vergl. Lit.-gesch., pp. 1-34, 1892. 

^Biblloph. Frangais, IV, p. 69 f. * Book of Sindibdd, p. 47. 

* It is hard to see how Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, 2d ed., p. 51 f., 
and a few others, can still persist in their adherence to the old view. 



28 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

of the stories amaiores and amicl (the latter appended to 
vaticlnium), the fusion of senescalcus and Roma, and its 
unusual mass of details. 

3. K. The Old French metrical version, Li Romans des 
Sept Sages, was published by Keller, at Tubingen, in 1836. 
Of this version there exists only one complete manuscript, to 
which its editor gives a date in the late thirteenth century. 
A fragment of a metrical text agreeing closely with it in 
content, but differing slightly in order of stories, is preserved 
in MS. 620 of the Library of Chartres.^ An edition of this 
has been promised by Paris. 

K has the same stories as D* and ^*, but in a different 
order. The agreement in order, as also in incident, is, as a 
rule, closest with D* ; in the stories vidua, Roma, inclusa, and 
vaiicinium, however, K exhibits a very close, at times even 
verbal, agreement with J.*. In explanation of this, the possi- 
bility of an influence of ^on^* is precluded by the fact that 
the former is of earlier date ; hence it is necessary to posit for 
-4* and K a common source, designated by Paris as V. 

4. /. The Versio Italica was first so styled by Mussafia in 
his study of the Italian versions, in Jahrb.f. rom. u. englische 
Lit, IV, p. [QQ f., 1862. This group consists of six versions, 
three of which are in Latin. One of the latter has been 
brought to light only within the last few years ;^ one was 
published by Mussafia ( Wiener^ Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. 
CI., LVii, p. 94 f.) in 1868, and is well known; and the third 
is the British Museum MS. Addl. 15685.^ Of the Italian 
versions one is in verse,* but of late date, — Rajna in his 
description (Romania, vii, pp. 22 f., 369 f. ; x, p. 1 f.) plac- 

* See Paris, I. c, p. iii n., and Paul Meyer in the Bulletin d. I. Soc. des 
Anc. Texles frangais, 1894, p. 40 f. The order of stories here is — tenlamina, 
Buma, avis, sapientes, vidua, Virgilius, inclusa, vaiicinium. For the order in 
K and other versions, see the comparative table, p. 35. 

* By Murko ; see Romania, xx, p. 373. 

' Ward, Catalogue of Romances, ii, p. 207 f. Hitherto unnoticed in this 
connection. 

* Edited by Rajna, Storia di Siefano, Bologna, 1881. 



I 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 29 

iDg it between 1440 and 1480. The two remaining Italian 
versions early underwent publication, one in 1832 by Delia 
Lucia/ the other by Cappelli in 1865.^ 

The order of stories in I is materially different from that 
in any other group or version. The queen in this group, 
instead of relating the first story, follows in each instance the 
sage, thus reversing the order, — 2 becoming 1, 4-3, and so 
on. In consequence of this innovation, the number of stories 
is reduced to fourteen, the seventh being crowded out.^ 

In the absence of the filia-noverca and amatores-amici 
features, I groups itself with isT, D*, and J.*. Its closest 
agreement in incident is with ^*, in which recent scholars 
believe it to have had its source.^ 

The modern Italian Erasto, which at one time was placed 
by itself as representing a free adaptation of the romance, 
and as bearing a somewhat similar relation to the remaining 
Italian versions as the Dolopathos to the prevailing French 
type, is now universally acknowledged to be an offspring of 
the Versio Italica. The Erasto has been very popular in its 
own country, and has been translated into other languages. 
The first edition of it appeared at Venice in 1 542, the last in 
1841. An English translation was made by Frances Kirkman 
in 1674. 

5, French Prose Redactions. The number of French prose 
redactions is very large. Paris already in 1876 knew of nine- 
teen manuscripts in Paris, besides the four in Brussels, and 
one in the Cambridge University Library. A number of 
others have been since pointed out.^ 

^ Delia Lucia, Novella antica scrilla nel buon sec. d. lingua, Venice, 1832. 

'^ Cappelli, // libro dei sette sard di Roma, Bologna, 1865. 

^ It is interesting to note here that the story thus discarded is senescalcxis, — 
a feature in which the Versio Italica has anticipated one of the English 
versions — Cambridge Ff, ii, 38 {F). 

^See, for the most recent opinion, Rajna in Romania, vii, p. 369 f. 

^ These are mentioned under the discussion of the various groups into 
which they fall. 



30 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

(1). Paris classifies under the sub-groups Z)* (T^, X, A*, 
and 31. Of these 31 — the 3fale 3Iarastre — is of little interest 
other than as showing the immense popularity of the romance 
in the thirteenth century. Only three manuscripts of it have 
so far been brought to light. In all these the emperor is 
Diocletian and the prince, Fiseus ; Marcus, son of Cato, 
is given prominence ; and, a feature which distinguishes this 
sharply from all other groups, six new stories are substituted 
for a corresponding number of those in the prevailing types. 
The original of 31 is believed to have been made on a very 
mutilated manuscript of the^*-type. The new stories, which 
are of a much lower order than those they displace, are proba- 
bly the invention of the author.^ 

(2). With J/ may be associated the numerous 'continuations'^ 
of the Sept Sages in French, of which the most important is 
the 3Iarques de Rome. This type originated in Picardy in the 
thirteenth century. A version of it has been recently pub- 
lished by Alton (Zi Romans de 3Iarques de Roine, Tubingen, 
1 889). In the introduction to this edition, the editor states 
that the romance -svas certainly not written later than 1277, 
and probably even forty years earlier (Alton, p. xiv). It 
seems to have met with considerable popularity, as Alton 
describes ten manuscripts which still survive. It doubtless 
had its ultimate basis in A* — Alton thinks with 31 as an 
intervening stage, but Paris {Romania^ xix, p. 493) denies 
this, maintaining that ili'is posterior to the 3farques. 

(3). D*. The Version Derimee, a unique prose manuscript 
published by Paris as the first text of his Deux Redactions 
(pp. 1-55), is thus called on account of the numerous instances 
of rime still discernible in the text, and which prove beyond 
doubt a metrical original.^ 

' See Paris, /. c, p. xxiir f. 

-' For these compare P. Paris, Lea MSS. fran^ais de la Bihl. du Roi, Paris, 
1836, I, p. 109 f. More accessible in Leroux de Lincy, /. c, p. x f. 
' This was first shown by Paris, Deu£ Redactions^ p. v f. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 31 

Z)* agrees more closely with K than with any other known 
version. It cannot have been based on K, however, as Paris 
has shown, but the two doubtless flow from a common source, 
which Paris designates as V. From this V, also, the Chartres 
manuscript was in all probability made (Paris, /. c, p. x.) 

(4). There remain the two families L and J.*. The first 
of these comprises all versions of the type of the first Leroux 
de Lincy print,^ in which the order of stories is arbor, canis, 
aper, medicus, gaza, puteus, senescalcus, tentamina, Virgilius, 
avis, sapientes, noverca, filia. Only six manuscripts (four 
strictly according to L, and two slightly influenced by J.*) 
were known to Paris {I. c, p. 10 f.). To these must be added 
the Catalan version in ottava rima, edited by Mussa^a. (Wiener 
Akad. Denkschr., xxv, p. 185 f, 1876), and five Old French 
prose manuscripts, partly fragmentary, enumerated by Paul 
Meyer in Bulletin de la Soc. des Anc. Textes Jr. for 1894, 
p. 38 f 2 

In its employment of the stones filia and noverca, L at once 
groups itself with S. This, however, is not the only feature 
which the two types have in common. A general comparison 
with the rest of the Western group serves to show that (if we 
may except ^* for the time being) 8 is also nearest to L in 
motive (Paris, I. c, p. xir). In order of stories, too, S and 
L fall together, the only diflereuces being the reversal on the 
part of L of tentamina and puteus, and the suppression of 
vidua and vatidnium. Paris has therefore concluded that L 
was made on a manuscript of S which was mutilated toward 
the end, and that the scribe has in consequence had to trust to 
his memory for his last stories {I. c, p. xiii). 

* Leroux de Lincy, Romans des Sept Sages, Paris, 1838, pp. 1-76. 

' Meyer does not express himself definitely as to the class of but one of 
these — the Chartres ms., which he groups with L. He implies, however, 
in his statement that the Bib. Nat. fragment (p. 39, n. 2) belongs to A*, 
that all the rest belong to L. Nevertheless, his notices leave the impres- 
sion that some of these manuscripts (possibly all except the two just 
mentioned) have not been handled, and that a part of them may yet be 
found to belong to the larger group A^. 



32 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

(5). -A*, the largest and most important of all French 
groups, has been reserved for the last place. To this family 
pertain, besides its immediate members, the groups Marques^ 
31, I, and H; it is, then, the original, either directly or indi- 
rectly, of four-fifths of the manuscripts and prints of the 
romance which survive. It is not only the ultimate source 
of all Italian versions, — whether direct, as with the D'Ancona 
edition, or indirect through 7, but it is also, through H, the 
parent of almost all the manifold versions of the Sept Sages 
outside of Romance. And, what is of prime interest and 
importance to the English student, it was some manuscript 
of this group which furnished the immediate original of the 
Middle English versions. 

Under group ^* Paris includes all manuscripts of the type 
of the Italian version published by D'Ancona.^ He enumer- 
ates in his preface (p. xvi f.), in addition to the Italian 
version whence the group is named, fourteen manuscripts 
in Old French,^ several of which date from the thirteenth 
century. Four other manuscripts, pointed out since the 
appearance of Paris's work (Brit. Mus. Harl. 3860 [xiv cent.], 
St. Jno. Bapt. Coll., Oxf., 102 [xiv cent.],^ Cambr. Univy. 
Li by. Gg. 6, 28,* and a fragment in the Bib. Nat.-Nouv. 
Acq. fr. 1263 [xiii cent.]),^ increase the number of French 
versions to eighteen. To this family, also, belongs the British 
Museum Italian prose version published by Yarnhagen.^ 

The text of ^*^ falls into two parts, — the first eleven 
stories (^i*) being textually very close to Z, while the last 
four (^2*)? as Paris has shown, agree very closely with K, 

^ 11 Libro del Selle Savj di Roma, Pisa, 1864. 

^ One of these is the manuscript 2137 of the Bib. Nat., published in part 
by Leroux de Lincy, pp. 79-110. 

^ For these two, cf. Varnhagen, Z.f. rom. Ph., i, p. 555 f. See also for the 
first, Ward, /. c, ii, p. 199 f. 

* Romania, xv, p. 348. 

* Delisle, MSS. lat. et fr. ajoutees aux Fondes, etc., Paris, 1891, i, p. 1259. 
''' Eine Ilal. Prosaversion der Sieben Weisen, Berlin, 1881. 

^ By this is meant the second Leroux de Lincy redaction. Other versions 
of this type, as, e. </., MS. 6849 (new No. 189), are not so close to L. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 33 

The composite nature of the text Paris explains as due to the 
fact that the scribe primarily employed a fragment of X con- 
taining only eleven tales, and that iT, or its source, F, has 
been used for the remaining four tales.^ And this seems to be 
borne out by internal evidence ; for J.2* not only falls in with 
^as regards incident, but, as in the case of i)*, there is' often 
even a textual agreement in which entire lines that appear 
in K are reproduced.^ Yet, as already observed, this metrical 
original of A^^ cannot have been K, since there are a number 
of J-*-manuscripts which antedate the latter, especially if we 
may accept Keller, who despite his maintenance of the priority 
of iT, ventured a date no earlier than 1284, or later in all 
probability than the composition of the English parent text. 
Moreover, a comparison of ^2* with K and D* will show 
that each of the latter possesses features in common with J.* 
which are not found in the other. The original of -4 2* must 
therefore be sought in some other version than K, — probably, 
as Paris assumes, in V? 

^ Deux Redactions, p. xviii. 

- Ibid., p. XIX, for a citation of parallel passages from ^2"^ and K. Almost 
as noteworthy agreement will be found in some of the remaining stories. 

^ But can this be final ? Is it not possible, however improbable it may 
seem, that the manuscripts of A* which have survived were ultimately 
based on a metrical text which preserved the yl*-order of stories (or, at 
least, was nearer the ^*-order than the K-, C*- or D*-order), and which was 
closely related with F? In this case, of course, L (the first eleven. stories), 
would have to be explained as based on ^* (rather than the reverse, as 
with Paris), and A a* as representing a prosing of a portion of the metrical 
A*, to which K has very nearly approached. Against this view would 
be the strong evidence submitted by Paris. In favor of it, however, are 
the considerations (1) that this would better account for the popularity 
of the ^*-type during the first half of the thirteenth century ; (2) that the 
Middle English versions both favor a metrical original and were based on 
a text nearer to K in many details than is the De Lincy print of A* ; (3) 
that to base A* on X, and consequently, as Paris maintains, ultimately on 
S, is to connect it with a different line of tradition from that which it 
seems to follow (cf. certain textual agreements with ^ which A'*', L exhibit : 
p. 16 : " comme il fist au cheualier de son leureier " ■= Kl 141-2 : " Comma 
il fist au cheualier, Ki atort occist son leurier ; " p. 39 : "II apela son senes- 
chal "= K 1509 : '* Lors apiela son seneschal ; " p. 40 : " Vos gerrez auec le 

3 



34 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Resume. Looked at externally the Western group falls 
into two main sub-groups, the Dolopathos and the Sept Sages 
de Borne. The Dolopathos^ however, did not develop from 
the Eastern group independently, but must have had an 
ultimate basis (doubtless through an oral medium) on some 
version of the larger group. 

The Sept Sages de Rome, as regards order and content of 
stories, also falls into two groups, — one represented by S and 
L, the other by iT, D*, C*, ( V), and ^* and its variants, /, 
H, 31, and Marques. Peculiar to the former group {S, L) are 
the stories jilia and noverca, to the latter the stories Roma 
and inclusa. 

Which of these groups represents most faithfully the lost 
western original is, at the present stage of our knowledge, 
impossible to determine, but the fact that the Dolopathos of 
Herbert contains the story inclusa seems to point to the 
priority of the K-, i)*-, J.*-group.^ 

With respect to the separate sub-groups, L may have been 
based on A"^ and S, though the view of Paris, that it had its 
basis in S alone, carries with it greater probability. Either 
explanation leaves the origin of S unexplained. K, D*, (7* go 
back to the same lost metrical original, V. ^* is probably to 
be explained with Paris as having its source in L and V, though 
this, as yet, has been by no means established. It is not 
improbable that a metrical version of ^* existed at some time. 

roi"=iiri531: "Auoeques le roi vous girois;" p. 50: "Qui me ferra, je 
trerai ja"=^3938: "Ki me ferra, je trairai ia"); (4) that we may still 
find in A*, what appear to be reflections of a versified original ; thus, p. 15 : 
" Celz que je mout amoie et en qui je me fioie ; " p. 23 : " Li sangliers vint 
vers I'alier, si commenya a mengier," and " quant il vit le sanglier, si s'en 
volt aler;" p. 33: "Quant eles virent lor pere trainer, si commencierent 
(tl brere et) si crier;" p. 50: "Sire, il ot en ceste vile un clerc qui ot non 
Vergile." When all this is said, however, the case is by no means strong, 
and we would not presume to insist on this theory as presenting the proba- 
bility, by any means, which attaches to the view set forth by Paris; it is 
merely suggested as an alternate possibility, which has not yet been dis- 
posed of. 

'See also, Paris, Romania, iv, p. 128, for the additional evidence in 
support of this view drawn from the story Roma. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



35 



Table of Stories in the Western Versions} 



A* 


L 


s 


K 


D* 


arbor 


arbor 


arbor 


arbor 


arbor 


cams 


cams 


cams 


cams 


cams 


aper 


aper 


aper 


senesc. 


senesc. 


medicus 


medicus 


medicus 


medicus 


medicus 


gaza 


gaza 


gaza 


aper 


aper 


puteus 


puteus 


tentam. 


puteus 


puteus 


senescalcus 


senesc. 


senesc. 


sapient. 


sapient. 


tentamina 


tentam. 


puteus 


tentam. 


tentam. 


Virgilius 


Virgil. 


Virgil. 


Roma. 


Roma. 


avis 


avis. 


avis. 


avis 


avis 


sapientes 


sapient. 


sapient. 


gaza 


gaza 


vidua 


noverca 


vidua 


vidua 


vidua 


Eoma 


filia 


filia 


Virgil. 


Virgil. 


inclusa 
vaticinium 




noverca 
vaticin. 


inclusa 
vaticin. 


inclusa 
vatic. 4- 






H 


I 


M 


arbor 




arbor 


cams 


cams 


cams 


aper 


arbor 


aper 


puteus 


medicus 


medicus 


gaza 


aper 


gaza 


avis 


tentam. 


avis 


sapient. 


sapient. 


filius 


tentam. 


avis 


vidua 


Virgil. 


gaza 


nutrix 


medicus 


inclusa 


Antenor 


sen. — Rom. 


Roma 


spurius 


amatores 


vidua 


cardamum 


inclusa 


Virgil. 


assass. 


vidua 


puteus 


inclusa 


vat. — amici. 


vaticin. 


vaticin. 



JDolopathos. 

canis 
gaza 
series 
creditor 
vid.— fil. 
latro. — fil. 



cyg.— eq. 
incl. — put. 



II. The Eomance in England. 

The enormous popularity of the Seven Sages in French 
found but a faint reflection in early English. So far, only 
eight Middle English versions have been brought to light, 
and as at least seven of these go back to the same lost origi- 
nal, it appears that the romance did not at first take a very 
firm root in English soil. Nor has it in more recent times 
acquired the popularity in England that it enjoyed in other 
countries of Europe ; for, besides the numerous chap-book 
versions, all which are of a low order of excellence, there 
have survived only two versions belonging to the Modern 
English period. 

Yet, despite this comparatively small popularity of the 
romance in England, it is very evident that the English 

^ The order of the fragmentary Old French metrical version C* is as 
follows : — tentamina, Roma, avis, sapientes, vidua, Virgilius, inclusa, vaticinium. 
In the Varnhagen Italian prose version, puteus has been supplanted by a 
new story, which V. calls mercator. All the Middle English versions save 
F (for which see p. 62 of this study) follow the -4^-order. The later Eng- 
lish versions belong to group H. 



36 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

versions have not received attention commensurate with their 
importance. Indeed, there is no department of the study of 
the Seven Sages, much neglected though all have unfortu- 
nately been, which has been more neglected than the English. 
Weber, the first in the field, offered with his edition of the 
Auchinleck text practically no introduction at all.^ Likewise 
Wright, in the essay which accompanied the Cambridge text 
(Dd, I, 17), while he presented an abstract of the Historian 
confined the discussion of his own text, singularly enough, to 
less than two pages.^ Besides these, Ellis in his Specimens^ 
Clouston in his Booh of Sindibdd,^ and Gomme in the preface 
to his reprint of the Wynkyn de Worde edition ^ have sub- 
mitted analyses of the Weber, Wright, and Wynkyn de Worde 
editions respectively, and sundry others have made incidental 
references ; but there has so far appeared only one detailed 
and serious investigation of the problems which the English 
versions present — the dissertation Ueber die mittelenglischen 
Fassungen der Sage von den sieben weisen lleistern, Breslau, 
1885, by Paul Petras. This scholar, in dealing with the 
source and inter-connection of the English versions, has 
arrived at some very gratifying results, but his work leaves 
much to be desired. Three of the eight Middle English 
versions have escaped notice at his hands, as also, for some 
unaccountable reason, the well-known edition of Wynkyn de 
Worde, — and a good half of his conclusions may be overthrown 
by a more thorough investigation. In view, then, of this 
manifest neglect of the English versions another detailed 
study of them — especially of the relations of the Middle 

^Metrical Romances, Edinburgh, 1810, i, p. LV and iii, pp. 1-153. 

* I'he Seven Sages, Percy Society Publications, vol. xvi, p. lxviii, London, 
1845; also in Wartou^s History of English Poetry, ed. Hazlitt, London, 1871, 
I, p. 305 f. 

^Specimens of Early English Metrical Romances, London, 1811, in, pp. 
1-101. 

*Book ofSindihdd [Glasgow], 1884, p. 327 f. 

* The History of the Seven Wise Masters of Rome, published for the Villon 
Society, London, 1885. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 37 

English manuscripts — will not, it is believed, be deemed 
untimely. 

II (a). The 3fidcUe English Versions. 

The Middle English group comprises eight known versions, 
in as many different manuscripts. All these are in verse, 
and in the octosyllabic or four-stressed couplet. 

They are as follows : Auchinleck (A), Arundel 140 (^?'), 
Egerton 1995 {E), Balliol College 354 (B), Cambridge Ff, 
II, 38 {F), Cotton Galba E, ix (C), Cambridge Dd, i, 17 (i)), 
and Asloan (As)} 

1. Description of the Manuscripts » 

A, — The Auchinleck MS. of the Advocate's Library, Edin- 
burgh, denoted throughout as A, For a general description 
of this manuscript, see Kdlbing, Englische Studien, vii, p. 
185 f. The text of the Seven Sages occupies ff. 85a-99d, 
and is fragmentary at both beginning and end, only 2645 
lines remaining. It has been published by Weber, Metrical 
Romances J Edinburgh, 1810, iii, pp. 1-153, where it com- 
prises lines 135-2779, the Cotton MS. ((7) having been used for 
the remainder. For a collation of this edition with the manu- 
script, see Kdlbing, Englische Studien, vi, p. 443 f. Copious 
extracts with an analysis may be found in Ellis's Specimens, 
London, 1811, iii, pp. 1-101. With regard to date of com- 
position there is no internal evidence other than linguistic ; 
since, however, the Auchinleck MS. dates from about 1330, 
the composition of A must fall before that time.^ The form 

^ I have handled and made transcripts of all these manuscripts save those 
which have been printed and the Asloan. Five of them {A, E, (7, F, and 
D) have been studied either in whole or in part by Petras, and the Asloan 
MS. was also known to him through Laing's very incomplete description of 
it in the preface to his edition of the Rolland text, p. xii. Of the Arundel 
and Balliol manuscripts Petras was apparently unaware. 

^ Cf. Morsbach, M. E. Grammatik, Halle, 1896, p. xi, and Brandl in Paul's 
Chrundriss, ii, 1, p. 635. 



38 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

hardly justifies a dating earlier than 1300. In text and 
metre A is, as a rule, very good, though in both there are 
occasional imperfections and corruptions.^ The dialect is 
Kentish, though not of the strict type.^ 

Ar. — MS. Arundel 140 of the British Museum, — cited as 
Ar. Paper, dating from the first half of the fifteenth century. 
For general description, see Ward, Catalogue of Romances ^ ii, 
p. 224. This text occupies ff. 152-1 6 5 b, and is fragmentary, 
beginning with the conclusion of aper (3) and ending with 
the 21st line of vaticinium (15); 2565 lines remain. It is 
very much faded, and in many cases illegible, especially at 
the end of the b- and at the beginning of the c-columns. With 
regard to initial capitalization, it is very irregular. A line 
has been lost after 1. 618 ; after 1. 919 an extra line has been 
introduced with no corresponding rime. The text is metri- 
cally very poor, and many final e's have to be inserted in 
order to secure the required four stresses ; there are also a 
number of imperfect rimes (such as yspede : saue, 243-4) 
and other textual irregularities ; nevertheless, JL?', as is shown 
below, is the closest representative of the lost M. E. original. 
The dialect is Kentish.^ The text has not been published. 

' There are many emendations which lie on the surface and which are 
sustained by the closely related versions Ar, E, etc. Some of these are : 
(1) for schild 1016 read schuld{e)—cf. F 1487, Ar, B, E; (2) for sxvich 1031 
read syke or se^-e— cf. ^7-91, etc.; (3) for tol of 2050 read to lof—d. E 2082, 
etc. ; (4) for to-delue 2417 read go delae—d. B 2509, etc. ; (5) after He 2657, 
insert )>ouic,t — cf. Ar 1782, etc. 

*A. S. y is regularly represented by the e-sound, though this may not 
always be graphic. Of the 27 determining rimes, 22, or 81 per cent., 
have the e-coloring. There is nothing in other developments to contradict 
this result. The only Northern forms in the rime are a pres. part, in 
-and, 1977-8, and two instances of the third pers. sing, of the present tense 
in 8, 615-6 and 937-8. 

•■' To the development of A. S. y (stable or unstable, long or short) into e, 
there is only one certain exception : wyne : syne, 691-2. Elsewhere we find 
only the e-quality; cf. nede: hyde, 383-4 ; ifet: iknet, 601-2; gardyner : fyr, 
863-4, 872-3; also 892-3, 939-40, 979-80, 1433-4, 1515-6, 1535-6, 1541-2, 
1583-4, 1761-2, 1847-8, 2059-60. The additional rime-evidence is alto- 
gether confirmatory of a Southern scribe : A. S. d > o unexceptionally, the 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 39 

E.— MS. Egerton 1995 of the British Museum/— cited 
throughout as E. Ff. 3-54b. Paper, dating from the fif- 
teenth century, — probably the second half ^ Written in single 
columns, with initials in red. Very regular as regards capital- 
ization. Complete, containing 3588 lines, and bearing the 
title Seven Sages of Eome, with the colophon Explidunt Septem 
Sapientes. Before the first story, arbor, stands the simple 
rubric, " He[re] begynnythe the fyrste tale of the Emperasse;'' 
before nine others, there is substituted for this a couplet indi- 
cating the contents of the story which follows, as e. g., canis 
(695-6) : 

' Here begynnythe the tale of a knyght 
That cylde hys grehounde with unryght.' 

The stories avis, vidua, Roma, inclusa, and vaticinium have 
nothing corresponding to this. The dialect is Kentish, though 
less strongly marked than in Ar.^ 'No edition of E has yet 
appeared. An extract, including 11. 2251-2358, accompanies 
the monograph of Petras, ^'Anhang," p. 54 f. 

B.— MS. No. 354 of Balliol College Library, Oxford,— 
denoted as B.^ Ff. 18a-54b. Paper, belonging to the early 

pres. part, (except buland : blynd, 1589-90) ends in -ng, the verb is Southern 
(save cry en: mene, 2556-7, where we have a Midland form), the past part, 
preserves, as a rule, the prefix, and rejects (in the case of the strong verb) 
the ending, etc. Within the line, however, there are occasional Northern 
forms, particularly of the pres. part., as buland, 1588, 1591, 1599, brynand, 
1922 ; but these are by no means the rule, the Southern form being in 
general preserved as well within the line as in the rime. 

^ For a general description of this manuscript, see Ward's Catalogue, ii, 
p. 218 f. 

^See the sixth article: "Gregory Skinner's Chronicle of the Mayors of 
London, ending in 1469," ff. 113-122b. 

'The usual development of A. S. y is e, or the e quality, — see the rimes 
of 11. 245-6, 577-8, 783-4, 845-6, 1323-4, 1545-6, 1799-1800, 1821-1822; 
but occasionally y, — cf. kynne: lynne (O.N. linna), 1317-8 and wynne: syne, 
1635-6. The evidence is otherwise strongly indicative of a Southern scribe, 
though a few Northern forms are borne out by the rime; cf hondya: stondys 
(3d sing.), 439-40, also kynye: yonge, 93-4, and yonge: connynge, 3581-2. 

*The existence of this version of the Seven Sages was first pointed out by 
Varnhagen, in his Eine Ital. Prosav. d. Sieben Weisen, Berlin, 1881, p. xi; 
see in the same connection his review of Petras, Eng. Stud., x, p. 279 f. 



40 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

sixteenth century.^ In single columns ; irregular in capitali- 
zation. Described in Coxe^s Catalogits, i, p. 110, as in the 
hand of John Hyde. The text is complete, containing 3708 
lines. The first rubric, which contains the title, reads as 
follows : " Here begynneth ]>e prologes of the vii. sagis or 
VII. wise masters which were named as here-after ffollowing." 
Each story has a heading or title, as e. g., arbor : " The 
empresse tale off the pynote tree." At the end of the text 
stands the colophon : ^' Thus endith of the vii. sages of Rome, 
which was drawen owt of crownycles and owt of wrytyng of 
old men, and many a notable tale is ther-in, as ys beffore 
sayde. Quod Kichard Hill." This manuscript contains very 
few abbreviations, and the language is much modernized. In 
line 1761 : "On the ffall suche as fell to a old ma?i by his 
wif," we have two lines in one. The rime is, if anything, 
slightly better than in A, Ar^ and E, but is, nevertheless, 
occasionally imperfect, cf. visage : noyse, 459-60; assonance, 
as in all other related M. E. texts, abounds ; often four lines 
rime together, and occasionally six, cf. 2583-8. The dialect 
is Southern.^ No edition of the text has yet appeared, but 
the E. E. T. S. has for some time been advertising the entire 
manuscript as needing editing. 

P.— MS. Ff, II, 38 (formerly marked More 690) of the 
Cambridge University Library, — denoted as F} Ff. 134a- 
156d. Paper, dating from about the middle of the fifteenth 
century. Written in double columns of about 40 11. to the 
column. Handwriting uniform ; irregular as to capitaliza- 
tion, though most lines begin with a capital. The beginnings 
of stories indicated merely by large initial capitals in red. 

^Cf. Art. 31, "Memoranda of Richard Hill," and Art. 98, "Names of 
Mayors (of London)." 

'^ Southern forms are sustained by the rime almost without exception, 
A. S. y is represented by both y and e, in about equal proportion ; the rimes 
in e are probably to be explained, however, as reminiscences of a Kentish, 
original. 

^Cf. Halliwell, Thornton Romances, Camden Society, vol. xxx, p. xxxvi f., 
and the Cambridge Univ. Lib. Catalogue of 3iss., ii, p. 408. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 41 

The text is fragmentary ; ff. 141 and 144 (or less than 400 
11.) have been lost, and fol. 135 is in a mutilated condition ;^ 
2555 11. remain. Criteria for determining the dialect are not 
abundant, as the manuscript is late and the forms are some- 
what mixed ; but the bulk of the evidence favors a Southern 
dialect.^ The text has not been edited, although, in view 
of its uniqueness, it is not uninteresting, and in its last four 
stories is of considerable value. Extracts are given by Halli- 
well, Thornton Romances, p. XLiii f , Wright, The Seven SageSy 
p. Lxx f., and Petras, l. c, p. 60 f. 

C— MS. Cotton Galba E, ix, of the British Museum,— 
denoted as C.^ Ff 25b-48b. Vellum ; in double columns, with 
initials in blue and red, and in a very plain hand of the first 
third of the fifteenth century. Complete, in 4328 11. Bearing 
the title pe Proces of pe Seuyn Sages. Each prolog and each 
story marked off by rubrics : in the case of the former, such 
as " Here bigins ]>e fyrst proces ^^ (called " prolong " after the 
fourth story), with the latter, " Here bygins )?e first tale of 
]>e whyfe," etc., the number being given in each instance, 
and, in the case of the masters' stories, their names also. 
The dialect is Northern. Both text and metre are very 
pure ; ^ the rime, especially, stands in marked contrast to the 
Southern versions, being almost free of assonance and the im- 

^ The Cambridge Catalogue fails to specify the leaves which have been lost. 
Petras (p. 8) and others go to the other extreme in asserting that the text 
is very incomplete. 

•A. S. a > 0, and the forms of the verb, with the exception of the strong 
past part., where -en is the usual ending, are Southern. The scribe, how- 
ever, probably belonged rather to the middle or western South than to 
Kent, or its neighborhood ; cf. the rimes in y where the ii-quality prevails : 
tyme: kynne, 813-4 ; wylte : pytte, 845-G ; hym: kynne, 871-2 ; 1348-9, 1636-7, 
etc. The rimes hedd: hydd, 200-1, and kende: sende, 1890-1, are probably 
to be traced to the Kentish original. 

^Cf. Ward's Catalogue, ii, p. 213 f., for a general description of this manu- 
script. 

* There are very few verses that are too short (among these are 84, 443, 
911, 1868, 1901, 1918, 2973), and almost none that are too full (cf. 843). 
Among the few inexact rimes are sa^es; message, 355-6; bread: assent, 2321- 
2; hew:mowe, 2842-3. 



42 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

perfections in which the latter abound. No complete edition 
of (7 has so far appeared; but lines 1-134 and 3108-4328 
are printed in Weber, Metr. Rom., in, pp. 1 f. and 108 f., 
where this text has been employed to supplement A. The 
story avis, comprising lines 2411-2548, appears in the "An- 
hang ^' to Petras's monograph, p. 56 f.^ 

D. — MS. Dd, I, 17 of the Cambridge University Library, 
— cited as D.^ Ff. 54a, col. 1 — 63a, col. 3. Parchment; in 
treble columns; appears to belong to the end of the fourteenth 
century.^ Textually very imperfect, and plainly the work of 
a careless scribe. Thirteen lines have apparently been lost, — 
after 1312, 1417, 1696, 1719, 2094, 2293, 2695, 2840, 2960, 
3057, 3134, 3365, 3395. Irregularities in rime are numerous, 
but in most cases easily emended.* The dialect is southeast 
Midland, with an intermixture of Northern forms.^ The 
text has been edited by Wright (Percy Society for 1845, vol. 
XVI, pp. 1-118). For a collation of this edition with the 
manuscript, see Kolbing in Englisclie Studien, vi, p. 448 f. 
An analysis of the romance on the basis of this text appears 
in Clouston's Book of Sindibdd, p. 327 f. 

As, — MS. Asloan, in the possession of Lord Talbot de 
Malahide, Malahide Castle, Ireland, — denoted by As. For a 
general description of the manuscript (quoted from Chalmers), 

^An edition of this manuscript by the lamented Dr. Eobert Morris was 
announced by the E. E. T. S. many years ago ; and an editor was advertised 
for for some time after Dr. Morris's death, but in the recent issues of the 
publications this advertisement no longer appears. It is the purpose of 
the present writer to prepare a critical edition of this text within the near 
future. 

* For a genera] description of this manuscript, see the Cambridge Cata- 
logue, I, p. 15 f.; Skeat, Publications of E. E. T. S., vol. xxxviii, p. xxiii f.; 
and Halliwell, Manuscript Rarities of Camhridcje, p. 3. 

'Morsbach, for some unknown reason, would place it earlier, "1300?"; 
see his M. E. Grammatik, p. 9. 

* Lines 337-9 may be explained as a triplet, but it is better to suppose 
that a verse has been lost. A more probable example of the triplet in 
M. E. is found in A, 915-7. 

■^See 8keat, E. E. T. S., vol. xxxviii, p. xxv, and Brandl, in PauUa 
Grundriss, n, 1, p. 635. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 43 

see Schipper^s Poems of Dunbar, Yiennaj 1891, Pt. 1, p. 5 f.^ 
The text of the Seven Sages occupies ff. 167-209, and bears 
the title The Buhe of the sevyne Sagis. According to Laing^ the 
text is incomplete, extending to only about 2800 lines, and the 
twelfth and thirteenth stories are wanting entirely. It begins. 



and ends. 



'Ane Empriour in tymes bygane 
In Rome callit Dioclesiane — ' 

' Syne geid till heuyn and sa do we 
Savis all Amen for cherite.' 



Its dialect is Scottish.^ A complete transcript, made by D. 
Laing in 1826, exists in the University Library, Edinburgh. 
An edition, long ago promised by Varnhagen, is expected to 
appear shortly in the Scottish Text Society Publications. 

2. Interrelation of the Middle English Vei^sioiis. 

With regard to the relationship of the Middle English 
versions there has been a variety of opinions, and, as in the 
case of the French versions, there has existed no little ignor- 
ance and error. The general tendency has been to consider 
any and all versions of the M. E. period independent trans- 
lations from the French. This has been nowhere better 
demonstrated than in Petras's dissertation, where it has been 
boldly maintained that at least four of the M. E. versions 
(Aj Cy F, D) are unrelated save through a common foreign 
original. And while others have been more conservative 
than Petras, the prevailing opinion seems to have been that a 
majority at least of the M. E. group are independent of each 
other. It will be one of the results of this study, however, it 
is believed, to show that seven of the eight M. E. versions 

^A further description, together with an extract containing the story avis, 
has recently appeared in Englische Sludien (xxv, p. 321 f.), through the 
kindness of Prof. Varnhagen. 

^The Seven Sages in ScoULnh Metre (Rolland), Edinburgh, 1837, p. xir. 

^ Chalmers says of it: "Evidently written by a Scotish versifier in the 
reign of James IV, as a number of Scotish terms occur, which would not 
have been introduced by a Scotish transcriber of an English work." 



44 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

are ultimately related through a common M. E. parent ver- 
sion {x), and it is held not improbable that the eighth (As) 
is also thus related to x. 

All the M. E. versions, however, do not represent the same 
line of tradition. One of the texts, D, as later shown, is a 
development from x, independent of the rest of the M. E. 
group, and Varnhagen holds that As was made directly from 
the Old French. The remaining versions fall together into 
one connected group, all related through a common original 
{y)j which goes back to x, but which was not identical with 
it. This group will be designated as Y. 

The close relationship of the texts which constitute this 
group Y is confirmed by evidence from all sides, but it can be 
no more effectively illustrated than by a comparative table of 
lines. For this purpose a line-for-line comparison of the 
section which the five most important texts of this group (A, 
Avy E, B, C) have in common has been made, the comparison 
being restricted to identical lines and similar rimes, with the 



(4)5 = 193111. 

Total II. Ident. II. Sim. rimes. 



following results : ^ 






(1)^ = 1816 11. 




Total 11. Ident. 11. 


Sim. ri% 


Ar.. 
E.... 
B... 
C... 


...1916 234 
...1843 125 
...1934 154 
...2067 26 

(2) ^r=: 1916 11. 


722 
636 
537 

2 


A... 
E... 
B... 
C... 


...1816 234 
...1843 169 
...1931 137 
...2067 19 

(3) E= 1843 11. 


722 
746 
646 
413 


A... 
Ar... 
B... 
C... 


...1816 125 
...1916 169 
...1931 83 
...2067 11 


636 
746 
558 
352 



A... 


..1816 154 


537 


Ar. 


..1916 137 


646 


E... 


..1843 83 


558 


0... 


...2067 13 

(5) C= 2067 11. 


281 


A... 


..1816 26 


f 


Ar. 


..1916 19 


413 


E... 


..1843 11 


352 


B... 


..1931 13 


281 



^ An illustration of the method by which these figures have been arrived 
at may be found in the appendix to this study. F, owing to special features 
which are discussed below, is excluded from this comparison. 

'Petras, p. 11, finds A and C, the entire texts being compared, to have 
1096 similar rimes. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



45 



But this comparison, while valuable as far as it goes, serves 
only to show a connection between the texts compared ; it 
does not suffice to show the nature of this connection. 
Accordingly, in addition to this, a comparison of motive or 
incident — as a safer basis for classification — has been made 
for the entire Middle English group ; and it is by means of 
this, in the main, that our results as to the interrelation of the 
M. E. versions have been reached. The limits of this publi- 
cation, however, preclude the submitting this except in part, 
so that only the tabulation for the story vidua {Matron of 
JEphesus) appears here. 



(1) A certain knight had a 
wife. (A, Ar, B, D state 
that he was a sheriff.) 

(2) They loved each other 
exceedingly. {Ar only 
relates that he loved her. 
In F, he will not permit 
her to go half a mile 
from him, " neither to 
church nor to cheping.") 

(3) A new sharp knife is 
given them. 

(4) While playing with this, 
f in the 

thumb. 

in the 
[ womb. 
(C, in the finger; F, in 
the hand ; JD is silent 
as to part. F adds that 
the wife was paring a 
pear.) 

(5) For dole he dies on the 
morrow. {F adds that 
he asks for a priest be- 
fore he dies.) 

(6) This was great folly. 



he cuts her 



A 


Ar 


E 


B 


C 


F 


D 


A 


{Ar) 


E 


B 


C 


F 




A 


Ar 


E 
E 


B 
B 


c 






A 


Ar 












A 


Ar 


E 




c 




D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 









A"^^ 80, "un 

vicomte en 

Loherainne." 



^* 



^* "el 
pouce.' 



46 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



(7) He was richly buried 
on the morrow, [B does 
not specify that it was 
on the morrow. E, B, C 
state that this occurs 
after a mass. D adds 
that the place of burial 
was outside the city, 
since there were objec 
tions to his being buried 
within the city.) 

(8) The wife refuses to leave 
the grave. 

(9) Her friends try to com- 
fort her. 

(10) They suggest that she is 
young, and may marry 
again, and beget chil- 
dren. 



(11) She rejects their sugges- 
tions, assuring them that 
she will die on his grave. 
They are sorry. 

(12) They make for her a 
"logge" on the grave. 

(13) Also, a fire. (D, she 
makes the fire herself. 
An addition of D is 
that she sends for her 
clothes.) 

(14) Her friends leave her; 
she moans. 

(15) On the same day three 
thieves have been taken. 
(^, on a day before ; B, 
silent ; F, one thief.) 

(16) They were knights who 
had wasted the country, 
and had been hanged as 
soon as captured. 



A 


Ar 


E 


{B) 


C 




W 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


C 


F 


D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 




D 


A 


Ar 




B 


c 






A 


Ar 




B 


c 






A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 






A 


Ar 


E 




c 




m 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 




1) 


A 


Ar 


{E) 


(B) 





(F) 


D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 







A* 

A*, "ses lig- 
nages." 

(^*)/'jueneet 
bele.'; (No 
mention of 
marrying in 
J.*, but see 
K and the 
D'Ancona 
text.) 

^*81. 



loge." 



A* 

A*, "a celui 
jour." 



A* 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



47 



(17) A certain knight was to 
guard the bodies for the 
first night. {A adds that 
he was to watch for three 
nights.) 

(18) Becoming cold, he spies 
the fire in the " church - 
haw/' goes thither, and 
finds the lady. 

(19) He asks to be let in. 

(20) She refuses his request. 
In A she swears by St. 
(John,— in Ar, E, B, by 
" St. Austyn.") 

(21) He assures her that he 
will do her no harm, 
and that he is a knight. 



(22) She lets him in ; he 
warms by the fire. (In 
D there is no mention 
of the wife's refusing 
to permit the knight to 
enter.) 



(23) 



He sees her making 
dole, and tells her she 
is foolish to do so, — that 
she may yet marry some 
knight. She replies that 
he was so kind that she 
may not love any other. 
{D adds that she begins 
to love him when she 
finds him to be a knight ; 
and that he lies with 
her.) 



(24) By and by he thinks of 
his charge. 

(25) And fearing guile, he 
rides fast to the gallows, 
only to find one of the 
bodies stolen. (A, Ar, E, 
B, he rides on a foal. ) 



Ar 

Ar 
Ar 

Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



E 



B 



C 



D 



D 



D 



D 



^*/'un chev- 
alier — la 
premiere 
nuit." 



A*, "cime- 
tiere." 



yl*82. 
A* 



A* {K 3768, 
" Je sui Ge- 
rart le fil 
Guion; " 
also D* 37.) 



^^83. 



48 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



(26) He fears he will lose his 
advancement if unable 
to recover the body. 

(27) Bethinks himself that 
"wimmen cou>e red." 



(28) So going to the widow, 
he asks counsel of her. 

(29) She agrees to help him if 
he will marry her. {B, 
E, she proposes only that 
he be her "leman," — 
he suggests matrimony. 
In C, she asks if he has 
a wife. ) 

(30) This being agreed to, she 
advises that they dig up 
the body of her husband, 
which is done. 

(31) But the knight objects 
to hanging up the body. 

(32) The lady puts a rope 
round the neck of the 
corpse. {E, the knight 
does it.) 

(33) She draws the body up, 
and hangs it fast. 

(34) The knight is aghast at 
this. 

(35) The knight recalls that 
the thief had a wound in 
his head, and fears that 
the " guile may be per- 
ceived" unless the hus- 
band have a similar one; 
this the wife advises him 
to make with his sword. 

(36) He declines to do it. 

(37) She asks for his sword, 
proposing to do it herself. 



\a 


Ar 


E 


B 


C 




D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


C 






A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 


F 


D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 


F 




A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 


F 


D 


A 


Ar 


E 




c 


F 




A 


Ar 


{E) 


B 


c 


F 




A 


Ar 






c 


F 




A 


Ar 


E 


B 








A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 


F 


D 


A 


Ar 


E 


{B) 


iC) 




D 


A 


Ar 


E 


B 


c 


F 





^* (the order 
of 26-7 re- 
versed in the 
French.) 



A'^ (cf. 
3817). 



K. 



A* 
A* 

A* 



^* 84, " une 
plaie en la 

teste." 



A* 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



49 



(38) She smites with all her 
strength " amid the 
brayn." (In D, she 
wounds him with a 
knife.) 

(39) The knight now knows 
her to be false. 

(40) He remembers that the 
thief's fore-teeth had 
been broken out. (Z), 
F, in agreement with 
A*, K, have two teeth ; 
but i 
dens. ^ 

(41) She proposes that he dis- 
figure her husband in like 
manner, but he refuses. 

(42) She does it herself with 
a stone. (In A, Ar, E, 
B, F, she knocks out all 
his teeth ; in D, only two. 
F inserts here another 
disfiguration — the loss of 
two fingers. In D, the 
body is not hung up till 
after the mutilation. ) 

(43) The wife states that she 
has now won his love, 
which he denies, adding 
that he would marry her 
for no treasure, lest she 
serve him as she has 
served her lord. 

(44) The sage wishes Diocle- 
tian such fortune if he do 
not respite the prince. 

(45) He asks that judgment 
be suspended till the 
morrow, when the prince 
will speak for himself. 

(46) The emperor agrees to 
this, and the crowds dis- 
perse. 

4 



Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



Ar 



E 



E 



E 



E 



E 



(E) 



B 



B 



{C) 



D 



A* 



(F) 



(D) 



A^ 



D 



{A*) 



A* 



C 



{A*) 



D 



A*%h. 



A* 



D 



A* 



50 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



(47) The emperor goes to 
his bower; the empress 
" lours " on him. (A, Ar 
add that his ** sergeants 
make solace" with him.) 

(48) The emperor is brought 
abed with riche baudekines. 

(49) The empress is silent till 
the morrow. 

(50) When she asks if he has 
heard the "geste," etc., 
why men made a feast of 
fools} (^r, "HowKome 
was in great dread." D 
likewise makes no men- 
tion of the feast of fools.) 



A 

A 
A 
A 


Ar 

Ar 

Ar 

{Ar) 


E 

E 
E 


B 

B 
B 


C 
(J 

c 


F 


B 
D 



A* 



A*, K 2347, 
" feste aus 
fox." 



A, — A is naturally the most valuable of all Middle Eng- 
lish versions, since it is found in the oldest manuscript which 
has come down to us, and doubtless in many respects best 
preserves the original. In view of its age one would at least 
hope to find in it either the parent English text or the closest 
representative of it, but a close collation with the remaining 
manuscripts shows that it is neither the one nor the other. 
It is not even a link in any one of the chains of development. 
This is established by the fact that A often abridges where all 
the other texts of Fare true to the French.^ 

There are, however, some features in which A appears to 
reflect the original more faithfully than any other member 
of its group. Thus, we find in A 666, "Deu vous doint 
bonjour'' = i 15, ^' Diex vos doint bon jor," where none 
approximate A save B 652, "And sayde, deux vous garde 
bonjour;" or, in A 743, "The levedi stod in pount tournis^^= 

^ For the origin of this feature, see Paris, Romania, iv, 128. 

'This phenomenon does not seem to be confined to our text, but appears 
also in other poems of the Auchinleck ms., as has been already observed 
by Kolbing; cf. his Arthour and Merlin, iv, p. CLiii, and his Bevis of Ham- 
toun, E. E. T. S., Ex. Ser., lxv, p. xli. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 51 

X 17, "sur le pont torneiz," where C reads "on a vice," and E, 
B, "in the castle on high." And there are sundry details of 
the original which A reproduces in common with only one 
other text; but these are easily explained by the circumstance 
of ^'s closer proximity in time to the parent text, in conse- 
quence of which it has suffered less from the ravages of time, or 
at the hand of the modernizer, than have some of the later texts. 

The abridgments of the original which characterize A fall 
chiefly in the conclusions of certain stories. In fact it is a 
noticeable feature — due probably to the desire to avoid repeti- 
tion — that it is almost entirely in the ^epilogaciouns^ (as some 
of the ^-texts name them) that A has made any serious altera- 
tions, while there is a very marked agreement, and only 
occasional freedom, exhibited in the body of its stories. 

This tendency to abridge is manifest throughout the J. -text. 
It is most violent, however, in the stories aper, gaza, Virgilius, 
and avis. Chief among the passages in other versions which 
find nothing corresponding in A, are the following : (1) aper^ 
Ar, 1-20 = E 949-968 = B 933-948 = C 1041-1058 = 
X, p. 25 ; (2) Virgilius, Ar 1280-1288 = E 2204-2212 == B 
2244-2252 = C 2370-2376 = L, p. 55 ; (3) avis, Ar 1433- 
1446 = E 2367-2372 = B 2401-2414 = L, p. 59. 

There is, in addition to these, in the conclusion of gaza, a 
fourth passage which A abridges radically, and which, since it 
is a comparatively close paraphrase of the Old French, may 
be cited here as giving a graphic illustration of this pecu- 
liarity of A, and, at the same time, as showing once for all 
its unoriginality, and its subordinate importance in settling 
the question of the interrelation of the English versions. 
This passage is, in ^?-, 11. 456-479; the corresponding lines 
are, in E 1401-1426, B 1393-1420, and C 1472-1490. Cita- 
tion is made from Ar as best representing the lost text Y. 

Ar 456 ' Loude )?ei gonne on hyra to crye, L 34. 'Chascun li escria : 

And saide, lentylyon kybe ^y mastry, Ha! mestre, or pansez de 
Helpe \>y disciple at Ms nede. vostre deciple.' 

pe master a-lyjt J>o of his stede, . . . * et descent de son 

cheval.' 



52 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



460 



465 



470 



475 



479 



And grete \>e Empcroitr on his kne. 

UnneJ>e wold he hym see. 

pe Emperour saide, bou fals man, 

Be hym hat al men-kynde wan, 

pou art fekell and fatour, 

Losenger and eke tray tour. 

A, why syr leue lord ? 

So nas I neuer, saue \>y word. 

Syr, >>y gentyll wyue late us her, 

And 'With goddes helpe we schull us 

skor. 
I sow toke my son to loke 
And for to tech hym on boke, 
And t>ou first bygan to tech, 
By-nome his tong and his spech, 
And taugt hym sith with mor stryf, 
Ffor to nyme forth my wyf. 
ge schull wite >eir-of nougt ; 
Bot when he is to de^e brougt, 
I schull dampne l^e and ]pj feren 
To drawe and honge by i>e swyren.' 



'. . . et s'en vient devant 
I'empereeur, si le salue: . . 
Li empereres respont au 
salu qui li a dit: Ja dex 
ne vos beneie.' 

*Avoi ! fet messires Lan- 
tules, pourcoi dites vos ce? 

' Ge le vos dirai, fait 11 
empereres,' je vos avoie 
baillie mon fil a aprendre 
et a endoctriner, et la pre- 
miere doctrine que li avez 
faite, si est que vos li avez 
la parole tolue ; 1' autre qui 
veult prendre ma fame a 
force. Mes ja Dex ne vos 
en doint joir ; et bien sa- 
chiez que tantost comme 
il sera morz, vos morroiz 
apres, et seroiz destruit 
ensement.' 



As against this A has only the following lines (1387-92) : 

'And th' emperour wel sone he fond : 

He gret him faire, ich understond. (= Ar 460) 

Th' emperour saide, so God me spede, (= Ar 462) 

Traitour, the schal be quit thi mede ! 

For mi sones mislerning, 

Ye schulle habbe evil ending ! ' 

Other less important omissions occur in the conclusions to 
aper and puteus : aper — the people invoke the master to help 
his disciple (L 25, C 1064, E^ B); puteus — the empress 
threatens, on learning of the respite of the prince, to leave on 
the morrow. Ar 624-5, "And saide scho wold away at 
morowe. Nai dame, he saide, jef God it wyll. . . ." = Z 38, 
"je m'en irai le matin. Non ferois, dame . . . . se dieux 
plest." The same incident is omitted in the ^-text of avis ; 
cf. L59, ^r 1440-1. 

In the body of the stories, as already observed, this tendency 
is not nearly so marked. There is in fact no significant 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 53 

feature of the stories of the original which has been preserved 
in any other English version that does not appear also in A, 
The nearest approaches to such are the following, both from 
the story Roma: (1) An old wise man (= J.* 86, " un home 
viel et ancien. . . .") makes the proposition that the city be put 
in charge of seven sages, a bit of detail which is omitted by no 
other English version ; (2) after these sages have kept the 
city for a month, the food supply is exhausted ; cf. ^r, E, B^ 
C, F, and ^* 86, " vitaille failli a ceuls." In addition to 
these there are certain other minor details in which one or 
more of the related English versions preserve the French 
more closely. For example, in medicus {A 1149), Ypocras 
pierces the ton in 1000 places, as against Ar (208), E, B, F, 
which agree with L 28, -c- broches. Likewise in VirgiliuSj 
A (1977-8) translates the O. F. ''arc de coivre et uue sajete, 
bien entesse '^ {L 60) as " arblast .... and quarel taisand,^' 
while the remaining members of group Frender more literally 
how and arrow ; in sapientes, C, Ar, Ey B have the masters 
ask Merlin his name, in agreement with L 60, " et li demand- 
Srent commant il avoit a non,'' where A abridges ; to which 
add that A makes no mention of the divine service at the 
burial of the husband in vidua, where E, B, C, fall in with 
^* 80, and that in the same story, A (2618) has the knight 
come to the gallows to watch three nights, while Ar, E, B, C 
fall together in their adherence to the French — A* 81, " la 
premiere nuit,^' and we have the sum of ^'s noteworthy 
variations within the body of its stories. 

Additions in A are even less numerous. An occasional 
extra couplet (so far as the evidence of the remaining English 
versions goes) now and then crops out, as e. g., 645-8, and we 
also find here and there additional details, such as (1) in Vti'- 
gilius, where the poor, in addition to warming themselves at 
the magician's wonderful fire, are represented as also prepar- 
ing their food by it (A 1973); and as (2) in sapientes, Herod 
is described as the richest man in Christendom {A 2340), — 
neither of which appears in any other text, whether English 



54 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

or Romance. But such additions are very few in number, 
and, in any case, too insignificant to play a prominent part in 
solving the problem in hand. They are, nevertheless, con- 
firmatory of the evidence already adduced, with which they 
unite in demonstrating conclusively the unoriginality of A. 

"We have, then, in J. a secondary development from the 
lost y. It cannot have been based on any manuscript of which 
any other text of F is a close transcript, since it preserves 
the original in some places more faithfully than any other 
M. E. text. On the other hand, it cannot have been the 
source of any of the known M. E. manuscripts, since all these 
preserve features of the French which A omits. 

Ar. — Nearest to A stands the fragmentary text from MS. 
Arundel 140. This version, while most important as repre- 
senting in all probability the lost y more closely than any 
other known text, has been singularly neglected by former 
investigators. Petras makes no mention of it, whence we 
draw the inference that he was unacquainted with it. And 
apparently the only notice which has been accorded it, beyond 
Varnhagen's several references to it,^ is that of Ward in his 
Catalogue of Romances (ii, p. 224 f.). From a comparison 
of the introductory lines ofAr with the corresponding passages 
in A, JE, C, Ward observed that its affinities seemed closest 
with E; and this indeed holds for the conclusions of several 
of the stories (Ward deals with a conclusion ; cf. our parallel- 
ling of lines for medicus, in Appendix), where A has been seen 
to be often free, and where J.r, in consequence, frequently 
agrees more closely with any other text than with A. It does 
not hold, however, as regards the stories themselves, where 
E yields the first place to A, 

Except in these conclusions, ^r agrees with A very closely. 
Their intimate relation is evident at once from our line-for- 
line statistics on p. 44. Of the 1916 lines of the J.r-section 
{= A 1816), 234 are identical with lines in A, and there are 

^ First referred to in his Eine Ilal. Prosaversion d. Sieben Weiserif p. xi, 
and later in liis review of Petras, Eng. Slud., x, p. 279. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 55 

722 similar rimes. Next comes ^ (1843 11.) with 169 iden- 
tical lines and 746 similar rimes, — a slightly larger percentage 
of rimes than for A, and an apparent discrepancy, which is, 
however, easily reconciled by the fact of A's characteristic 
curtailments; B (1931 11.) has 137 lines identical with Ar 
and 646 like rimes, and C, which comes last, has only 19 lines 
identical and 413 similar rimes. 

But the closer relationship of Ar to A develops conclusively 
only from a comparison of details. Here, while a careful colla- 
tion of Ar with all other members of F reveals no noteworthy 
bit of detail in common with any other single text when con- 
trasted with A, there are several interesting and significant 
agreements of Ar with A against the rest of Y. Among these 
are the following : (1) A 1462, *^ Ich wille bicome wod and 
wilde," which is identical with Ar 552 ; in JS 1498, the 
empress (who is speaking here) seeks to slay herself (cf. L 36, 
"seroie-je morte^^). (2) A 1580, "And he com als a 
leopard " = J.r 668, "pane cam he rynnyng as a lyvarde." 
(3) A 1588, "Bihote hem pans an handfolle'' = ^r 676, 
" Behote heme pens a pours full." (4) A 2396, "Al to loude 
thou spak thi latin " = J.r 1518, "To loude }>ou spake ]>y 
latyn." (5) A 2744, "Withe riche baudekines i-spredde'^ = 
Ar 1868, "With rich clo);es all byspred." None of these 
verses have anything corresponding in any other English text. 
Doubtless some of them are only accidental, but such cannot 
be the case with all. Their evidence is well supported by 
such further agreements as in senescalcus, where A and Ar 
unite in retaining the twenty marks of the original, other 
M. E. texts varying, or as in vidua where these two agree in 
that the wife is cut in the wombj while E, B preserve the 
French — in the thumb (J.* 80, el pouce), C states that the 
wounded part is a finger ^E the hand, and D is indefinite. 
Of these agreements there can be only one explanation, namely 
in the assumption of a connection between the two texts. 
What the nature of this relation is, however, can be best 



66 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

determined after a collection of corresponding data for the 
other manuscripts. 

In comparing the remaining texts with J.?-, one is at once 
struck with the remarkable agreement of B, E with J., Ar, 
These four versions have a number of features in common 
which do not survive in (7, F^ or D. Thus (1) in gaza^ the 
son stabs himself in the thigh (= L 33, en la cuisse), where 
C, F are free, the one reading chehe, the other honde. (2) In 
senescalcus, the king falls sick ^'by God's vengeance" (not in 
L ; also omitted by C, D, — F omitting the entire story). (3) 
Again in the same story, the king offers twenty marks or 
pounds for a lady to lie with (= L 40, xx mars), where C 
reads ten pounds^ and D simply ** gold and silver.^' And this 
is still more apparent in a line-for-line collation, as is suffi- 
ciently demonstrated in the Appendix. 

At the same time, also, one cannot but remark certain 
occasional agreements of ^r with E, B in opposition to A, For 
instance, (1) the king in senescalcus, with the former, has 
great delight in women, where A on the contrary, in agree- 
ment with the O. F., as also with C, D, describes him as 
disdaining women above all things (X 39, " II desdaingnoit 
fame seur toutes rieus "). And (2) in sapientes, the sages in 
Ar, E, B ask respite for seven days, where A, C give four- 
teen days, F 12, L 4-8, and J^ 15. Likewise (3) the servants 
of the king in sapientes dig under his bed " four feet or five '' 
in Ar, E, B, while A makes no mention of the distance, but 
says ten or twelve men dig ; so L 62, xx homes. To which 
is to be added (4) the agreement of Ar, E, B in having the 
husband in vidua {Ar 1756) swear by St. Austyne; — by 
St. Johain in A (2630). Nevertheless, these are not of such a 
nature as to contradict the classification of Ar with A, but 
merely indicate that in such cases, Ar best preserving the 
original, independence has been asserted by the poet of A. 

But in view of these and of A's frequent abridgments, we 
cannot look for the basis of Ar in A, nor — as it is hardly 
necessary to add, after the citation of textual agreements with 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 57 

A — in E or B^ — and still less, for even more obvious reasons, 
in C or F. The marked agreement of Ar with A, however, 
begets the assumption of a development of the former, parallel 
with the latter, from a common source r, through which 
they both go back to y. 

Certain agreements of Ar with E against all other versions 
including A (treated more at length under E) are not alto- 
gether easy to reconcile, but owing to Av'^ nearness to other 
texts — A in particular — as against E^ it is impossible to con- 
sider Ar as derived from it ; we are led rather to the converse 
assumption, of a partial connection, or contamination, of E 
with Ar^ or, in more likelihood, with the latter's immediate 
source r. 

That Ar so far as it goes, best preserves the lost M. E. 
original is borne out on all sides : (1) by its close agreement 
with the texts A and E^ which otherwise best reproduce this 
source ; (2) by the fact that F in the last four stories (in 
which we should expect a close adherence to its original) is 
closer to it than to any other text; and (3) that while A^ 
especially, and E^ B, in a less degree, often add or omit lines, 
Ar almost never adds, and in only rare cases abridges.^ 

However, that no manuscript which has survived was based 
on Ar follows from its occasional freedom, as e, g., (1) its 
rimes to 171-2, 227-8, 463-4, etc., which are parallelled by 
no other text, and (2) in Roma the names of Julius and July, 
— where all other texts better preserve the Genus (Janus) and 
January of the French. 

E. — With the exception of Ar, the Egerton MS. would be 
of most value in preparing a normalized text, since it next 
best preserves the original, and especially since it is complete. 

The value of E is considerably impaired, however, by the 
fact that its author — or more probably its scribe — has made 
an unusual number of textual abridgments, — as a rule for 

*The only addition in the first 1900 II. is 1871-2: 

* When day bygane to sprynge, 
And >e foules mery to synge.' 



68 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

single couplets only, yet in a few cases for a half-dozen or 
more lines. Some of these are the following ; (1) after 996 
= A 991-2,(2) 1024=J. 1019-20,(3)1216=^ 1211-2, 
(4) 1400=^ 1385-6, (5) 1500=^ 1465-6, (6) 1530=^ 
1500-1, (7) 1558 =^ 1529-30, (8) 1578 =A 1549-50, (9) 
1646= J. 1615-6, (10) 1652=^ 1623-4, (11) 1662=^ 
1633-4, (12) 1784=^ 1749-50, etc., and, most radical of 
all, (13) after 2472=^ 2424 f., where ten lines have been 
lost.^ In consequence of this, E is somewhat shorter than 
either of the other complete texts, B and C. For the 2564 
lines of the Arundel fragment, it has only 2365 ; and this 
number in reality should be reduced 18 lines, since the couplets 
with which E heads nine of its stories, and which have been 
included in this numbering, did not belong to the original, it 
is safe to assume, and should not, for purposes of comparison, 
be regarded as part of the text. 

But beyond these slight abridgments, the author of E has, 
in the handling of his original, exhibited almost no independ- 
ence. One looks in vain for such abridgments as characterize 
Af as also for significant additions such as are found in F and 
C Excepting such occasional freedom as the assigning to 
the incident in Roma the date of the first of January, and the 
changing of the bar-ber in tentamina into a borowe — a scribal 
error, doubtless — we shall find scarcely one other feature ex- 
clusively peculiar to Ey until we have reached almost the end 
of the poem, when the poet for once appears to assert his inde- 
pendence, and we have in consequence the very interesting 
addition that — 

' whenne that his fadyr dede was, 

He lete make a nobylle plas, 

^ The additions are less numerous. Among those which are parallelled 
by no more than one other text, or are peculiar to E, are (1) 986-7 (after 
A 974), (2) 1015-6 (a. A 1012), (3) 1245-6 (a. A 1238), (4) 1621-2 = ^ 
1591-2, (5) 1693-6 (a. A 1664), (6) 1761-2 (a. A 1726), (7) 1809-10 (a. A 
1780), (8) 2097-2103 (a. A 2068), (9) 2291-4 (a. A 2246), and (10) 2349- 
51 (a. A 2298). 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 59 

And a fayre abbeye he lete begynne, 
And VII. schore monkys brought thereyn, 
And euyr more to rede and synge 
For hys fadyr wit^-owte lesynge.' (3561-6) 

All other important variatioDs in E are repeated in some 
one or more of the related M. E. versions. The agreement 
here is closest with B and Ar. Its near relation to the latter 
has already been shown, and it has been pointed out that 
there are features in which the two are alone ; and there are 
also cases in which the two are alone in textual abridg- 
ments : e.g. Ar 227-8 =£'1171-2. It has also been seen 
under Avy that B in several instances falls in with Ey Ar, as 
against A, C, F. 

It remains to point out some of the motives common to 
E, B versus the remaining texts of Y. The most important 
of these are the following: (1) arbor — lords and ladies begin 
to weep when they see the prince led forth to be hanged ; 
(2) arbor — Bancyllas assures the emperor that the prince 
will recover his speech; (3) sapientes — both omit the detail 
of Aj Ar, C that Merlin declines the offer of money made 
by the man whose dream he has interpreted ; (4) vidua — 
the wife is cut in the thumb, where other texts have vari- 
ously womb, finger, and hand ; as also (5) vidua — the knight's 
disregarding the widow's suggestion that he knock out her 
husband's teeth ; (6) Roma — the sage who makes the propo- 
sition for saving Rome is called Junyus (A, C, F, Gemes ; Ar, 
Julius; D, Gynever). In several of these, to wit 3, 4, 5, it will 
be observed, E, B are truest to the French. 

Such evidence as this precludes the thought of a basis of E 
in Ar, but in view of the agreements between the two already 
noted, and, especially, of the fact that there is a greater num- 
ber of J.r-lines than of ^B-lines identical with jE^'s (cf. p. 44), 
it does not seem improbable — though I am unable to prove it — 
that the author of j& has known and been partly influenced hy Ar, 

On the other hand there is abundant evidence of an all but 
immediate connection between B and E: (1) in the agree- 
ments in details just cited, and (2) in the textual omissions 



60 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

and additions which the two have exclusively in common. 
Thus, of the thirteen jE-omissions collected above, six (1, 7, 
9, 10, 11, 12) are also in B; and of the ten additions cited in 
the foot-note (p. 58), three (1, 8, 9) are common to ^, — or a 
total of 9 out of 23 — a remarkable showing when it is borne 
in mind that in ten of these cases JE is alone, agreeing in only 
one case (abridgments — 9) with any other text than B. 

Despite these, however, E cannot have been based on J5, 
since it preserves in agreement with other texts — notably 
Ar — features of the original which B omits. 

In the next section it will be shown, also, that B was not 
based on E, and it will be further demonstrated that the two 
are related through a common source. 

B, — The Balliol text, like E, is complete and of late com- 
position. The analogy between the two does not stop here, 
however ; there are many things which bind them together, 
not only when looked at externally, but also from an interior 
point of view. One of the most striking phenomena \Yhich 
they have in common, and which one cannot but remark in 
comparing them with Ar and the remaining F-texts, is the 
tendency to reverse the order of words, or to substitute 
synonymous or analogous expressions, — in consequence of 
which the identity of the line and often the rime is destroyed. 
This is equally as prominent in B as in E, if not more so. 
In B especially, the change of epithet often flows, one feels, 
from a desire to modernize, rather than from a conscious 
effort, as might be supposed, to conceal the source. 

In some other respects, however, B and E are very unlike. 
For instance, while it is characteristic of E to drop out one 
or more couplets for every column, B is exceptionally free 
from such slight curtailments, while its additional couplets 
are comparatively numerous.^ Moreover, while E is at first 

^ In the first 1000 lines of the part selected for a line-for-line comparison 
{= B 933-1951), B has 16 couplets which do not appear in any other 
manuscript, and which were accordingly, in large part in all probability, 
its own additions. E, on the contrary, has only 4, or one-fourth as many 
(1015-6, 1245-6 and 1693-6). 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 61 

close to the original — more so by far in the first thousand 
lines than anywhere else — and becomes more and more free, B 
exhibits just the reverse tendency, and we find it in the last 
third of the poem textually almost as close to the original 
as is E. 

As regards incident, B is usually more free than any 
one of the texts so far treated. Its chief variations — in the 
nature of additions largely — are the following : (1) aper — 
the herd fills both arms and sleeves (later la-ps) with the haws; 

A, E^ laps = L 23, girons; C, Z), hood. (2) medieus — the ille- 
gitimate father of the sick prince, called in the remaining 
members of Y either the earl or the king of Naverne (= L 27, 
li quens de Namur) is not named. (3) puteus — besides the 
feature peculiar to Y, viz. that the burgess would only marry 
some one from a distance, B adds that he also would marry 
no poor woman, — with the additional information that he 
already had had two wives. The feature of A, E, Ar, that 
he made a covenant with the bride^s father, does not appear in 

B. (4) senescalcus — while in the remaining texts the steward 
is banished, in B he is put to death — and by pouring molten 
silver and lead down his throat. This incident, which consti- 
tutes the most violent freedom of B^ is apparently borrowed 
from VirgiliuSy where Crassus dies a similar death. The 
punishment in either case is fitted to the crime. (5) tenta- 
mina — the wife wishes to love the parish priesty where -4,^7*, 
Ej jP, C have simply pi^iest = L, provoire (but see Z)* 27, 
Messire Guillaume le chappelain de la parroise). (6) sapientes — 
they meet with the old man after two days; other texts not 
definite as to time. (7) Roma — the town is put in charge of 
two wise men ; in other texts it is seven. (8) inclusa — the 
knight has travelled only one month before he comes into 
the land of his lady ; according to other M. E. versions it is 
three months (JT, D*, A* 89, trois semaines; but cf. Varn- 
hagen^s Ital. Prosaversion, p. 36, b-e mesi. (9) inclusa — the 
wife's ring had been given her as a New Year's gift, — an 
invention of B. 



62 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

But while B has thus many features peculiar to itself, it 
possesses very few exclusively peculiar to itself and any one 
other text, — a circumstance which renders the problem of its 
relations somewhat difficult of solution. We may resort, 
however, to the verse-omissions or additions, and it is signifi- 
cant here that the evidence from motive-comparison (submitted 
already under E) which pointed to a relation with Ey receives 
very strong confirmation. In almost every instance in which 
B agrees in an addition or omission with only one other text, 
this text is E. Thus, in the first thousand lines of the con- 
stant element in Y (== B 934 f.), there is a total of ten such 
variations, of which nine are in agreement with E — the tenth 
being with (7, an agreement which can only be explained as a 
coincidence or, at least, as signifying nothing. The agreements 
with E^ however, cannot well be accidental. They offer strong 
confutation of the evidence of the line-collation (p. 44), which 
seems to indicate a closer relationship with A or Ar, 

That B was not based on either of the latter — A, Ar — 
follows from the fact that it preserves certain features of the 
original (cf. 3, 4, 5 of motive-agreements of E, B, p. 59) which 
they have either lost or altered. 

And that both B and E go back to y independently of each 
other is rendered improbable in the highest degree by their 
agreements in omissions and additions. We are forced then to 
the assumption of the existence at some time of a manuscript — 
denoted by s — which served as the common source of B 
and^. 

F. — There is no one of the M. E. texts of the Seven Sages 
which has been more imperfectly reported than that contained 
in the Cambridge University MS. Ff, ii, 38. Wright as early 
as 1845 was acquainted with this version, and printed in the 
introduction (p. Lxx) to his edition of D the opening lines, 
but vouchsafed no further description of the text than that it 
presented many different readings from A and was much 
mutilated. And Petras, on the basis of this description, and 
with tlie aid of about 190 lines of the text, has inclined to the 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 63 

view that i^is nearer to C than to any other M. E. version.^ 
Neither Wright nor Petras, however, has made reference to 
the description of Halliwell in his Thornton Romances (Cam- 
den Society Publications, xxx, p. xlii f.), and both were 
evidently ignorant of it. 

The description of Halliwell is the most reliable which has 
up to this time appeared ; yet in one or two instances it, too, 
is inaccurate. For example, the thirteenth story of F has 
been overlooked entirely; again it implies that there is only 
one new story introduced into this version, — the one which 
he prints on p. XLiii f. In reality there is a second story in 
-F which is peculiar to it, — the ninth story, to which Halliwell 
gives the name The Squyer and his Borowe. This tale is 
complete and runs as follows : 

' Hy t was a squyer of thys contre, 
1115 And full welbelouyd was he. 

Yn dedys of armys and yn justyng [145 b.] 

He bare hym beste yn hys begynnyng. 

So hyt befelle he had a systur sone, 

That for syluyr he had nome, 
1120 He was put yn preson strong, 

And schulde be dampned, and be hong. 

The squyer faste thedur can gon, 

And askyd them swythe anon 

What byng he had borne a-way ; 
1125 And they answeryd, and can say, 

He had stolen syluyr grete plente ; 

Therfore hangyd schulde he bee. 

The squyer hym {)rofurd, permafay, 

To be hys borowe tyll a certen day, 
1130 For to amende that he mysdede. 

Anon they toke hym yn that stede, 

And bounde hym faste fote and honde 

And caste hym yn-to preson stronge. 

They let hys cosyn go a-way 
1135 To quyte hym be a certen day. 

Grete pathes then used he, 

And men he slewe grete plente. 

Moche he stale and bare a-way. 

And stroyed the contre nyght and day. 

^See his dissertation, p. 31. Cf. also Varnhagen, in his review of Petras, 
Englische Studien, x, p. 281 f. 



64 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

1140 Bot upon >e squyer l^oght he nothyng 

That he yn preson lefte lyeng, 

So that tyme came as y yow say, 

But for the squyer came no paye. 

He was hanged on a galowe tree. 
1145 For hym was dole and grete pyte, 

When the noble squyer was slon, [145 c] 

For hym morned many oon. 

That odwr robbyd and stale raoche )>yng, 

And sethyn was hangyd at hys endyng. 
1150 Thus schall be-tyde of \>e, syr Emperour, 

And of thy sone, so gret of honour.' 

Otherwise HalliwelFs description is characterized by the 
strictest accuracy, and leaves no room for the assumption, 
apparently made by Petras, of an identity in the order of 
stories between F and the remaining M. E. versions. 

The correct order of stories in F is as follows : (1) arbor^ 
(2) puteus, (3) aper, (4) tentamina, (5) gaza (end of), (6) vidua, 
(7) Riotous Son (beginning of), (8) canis (end of), (9) Squyer 
and Borowe, (10) o,vis, (11) sapientes^ (12) medicus, (13) Roma, 
(14) inclusa, and (15) vaticinium. Eight stories then (1, 3, 5, 
10, 11, 13, 14, 15) retain their usual order. The two new 
stories, 7 and 9, supplant senescalcus and Virgilius, taking their 
respective order. For the remaining five stories, 2 changes 
place with 8, 4 with 12, 6 with 2, 8 with 4, and 12 with 6. 
For this order there is no parallel either in other English or 
in foreign versions, and there can be little doubt that it was 
original with the i^-redactor. 

In content, also, F is very unique. In some cases the orig- 
inal story has been altered almost beyond recognition. This 
alteration consists largely in textual abridgments, but it is also 
very evident in the many new incidents that have been intro- 
duced. 

The introduction, in contradistinction to the stories of the 
first part, is but slightly abridged. It exhibits several more 
or less interesting variations, but the only one of any signifi- 
cance is the assigning to the king's steward the distinction 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 65 

(accorded the king's retinue in the other texts) of making the 
petition which saves the prince's life the first day. 

* Then come forthe the steward, 
And seyde, syr, thys was not forward, 
When that y helde the thy londe, 
When ii. kynges bade ]pe batell with wrong, 
And then >ou swere be heuen kyng 
Thou schuldest neuer warne me myn askyng. 
Geue me thy sones lyfe to-day, 
Yentyll Emperour, y the pray, 
And let hym to-morowe be at >y wylle, 
Whethur >ou wylt hym saue or spylle. 
I graunt the, seyde the Emperour, 
To geue hym lyfe be seynt sauyour.* (380-391) 

Arbor is very much abridged, the story proper comprising 
only twenty lines. There is no mention of the burgess's going 
away from home, nor of the trimming away of the branches 
of the old tree. 

Of canis only a short fragment is left, for which compare 
Halliwell, Thornton Romances^ p. XLiv. 

Aper has to do with a "swynherde'' who has lost a "boor," 
and who 

* durste not go home to hys mete 

For drede hys maystyrs wolde hym bete,' 

but climbs a tree, and is making a repast of acorns when the 
wild-boar of the forest comes up. 

Medicus is one of the last four stories, — hence agrees faith- 
fully with its original. 

Only the conclusion of gaza has been preserved. 

Puteus has undergone radical alteration: (I) The curfew 
of the original is omitted. Instead of it there is a law in 
Rome that whosoever shall be found away from home at 
night with any woman other than his wife shall be stoned 
to death on the morrow. (2) The lover here is a " squire of 
great renown." (3) The burgess uses a rope in trying to get 
his wife from the well. (4) He has already had two wives 
before his marriage with the one who figures here. This 
5 



66 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

feature has been transplanted from the introduction to tenta- 
mina, where it properly belongs. 

Senescalcus and Virgilius do not appear in F. 

Teniamina is characterized by the addition of a fourth trial, 
the killing of the knight's hawk. Other features are (1) the 
assigning to the wife the office of the gardener in the first 
trial (she fells the tree, and sets " dokys and nettuls '' in its 
stead), (2) the omission of mention of the church as the meet- 
ing-place of mother and daughter, and (3) the transference to 
puteus of the ^ two- wives '-feature. 

Avisj though textually free, contains no unusual details 
other than (1) that the lover is a priest, and (2) that the wife 
is killed by the enraged husband. 

In sapienteSy however, there are several striking variations : 
(1) The sages build a ^' horde-house ''just above the city gate, 
which renders the emperor blind whenever he tries to pass it 
in going out of the city. (2) There is no mention of Merlin's 
first dream-interpretation, a feature in which F agrees with 
D, — an agreement, however, which can only be accidental 
since F contains the search for and meeting of the sages with 
Merlin, which we find no hint of in D. 

Vidua has the following peculiar features : (1) The husband 
will never let his wife go a half-mile from him, *^ neither to church 
nor to cheping." (2) The wife is paring a peai^ when she cuts 
herself (3) There is mention of only one thief, and he is not 
alluded to as a knight. (4) A " pyke and spade " are used in 
digging up the corpse. (6) In addition to the mutilations 
usually recorded, F adds a fourth, — the cutting off of two 
fingers which the knight claimed that the thief had lost. 

The last three stories, Roma, indusa, and vaticinium, offer 
essential agreement in detail with the other texts of Y. 

The variations of F are thus seen to be very numerous. 
Yet, significant though many of them are, they tell only half 
the story. The whole truth is revealed only when it is con- 
sidered that along with these, and partly consequent upon 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 67 

them, the length of the poem has been reduced by about 
one-third, or to little more than 2500 lines. 

And what is most noteworthy about this abridgment is 
that it is not carried through the entire text, but extends only 
through the eleventh story. Up to the conclusion of this 
story the greatest freedom prevails, old incidents are rejected 
and new ones introduced at will, and, again resorting to 
figures for forcible illustration, the text is reduced from a 
normal 2500 lines to scarcely more than 1000/ In the 
remaining four stories, however, there is, as has been seen, 
close agreement with the remaining texts of Y. 

How to account for this wholesale mutilation to which F 
has subjected its original is not an easy problem. One would 
think of a basis for the first part in oral accounts, but this is 
rendered extremely improbable by the fact that throughout 
this part there is frequent agreement of rimes, and not unusual 
identity of lines, with other M. E. versions. Or again, there 
is a possibility that F was made from some very fragmentary 
manuscript, but there is no substantial basis for this supposi- 
tion, and the changed order of stories is distinctly against it. 
The most probable view, by far, seems to be that the poet had 
before him a complete manuscript, which, for some reason, 
possibly to conceal his source, he has for the first eleven stories 
arbitrarily altered ; and that beginning with the twelfth story, 
having grown tired of his task, he has for the remaining stories 
reproduced his original with fidelity. 

With the acceptance of this explanation, the problem of F^s 
relationship is rendered comparatively simple ; for, if the 
variations of the first part are attributable to the poet, this 
part is of little value for purposes of comparison, and we are 
accordingly restricted to the last part as the basis for any 
investigation. 

For this part there is comparatively close textual agreement 
with Ey B, C, Ar, and A (the last two unfortunately frag- 
mentary here in part). No single important detail and a very 

^ For the corresponding part, E has 2593 lines, and B, 2658. 



68 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

small percentage of the rimes have been changed, while lines 
identical with one or more of the other texts are numerous. 
The agreement is closest with Ar as a rule, with E next in 
order; thus, for the 845 lines {F 1440-2285) which the three 
texts have in common, only 53 lines of F are identical with 
lines in F, while the corresponding figure for J.?- is 116. 
Again, for this section Ar has agreement with F in 26 couplets 
which do not appear in ^(i^ 1476-7, 1490-1, 1694-5 [B, ^], 
1714-5, 1726-31, 1738-9, 1754-5, 1774-7, 1790-1, etc). 
But despite this affinity with Ar, jP cannot have been based 
on it, for in one case (i^ 2280-1) Ar' lacks a couplet which both 
jE'and i^have preserved, and in other cases, it has made inde- 
pendent additions (cf. Ar 1896-7, 2374-7, 2384-5). This 
slight evidence is everywhere well supported : on the one 
hand we find B, though much farther removed than F or Ar^ 
nearest i^ (cf. B 1095 = i^ 1578) ; again A will be found to 
be nearest (cf. A dd7 = F 1464, A 1016 = F 1487, A 1048 
= F 1518, A 1088-9 = F 1553-4) ; while in other instances 
several will agree as against Ar (cf. A 2762 = B 2848 = F 
1679, and A 2751 = F 2762 = B 2833 = F 1662). 

In the face of this otherwise contradictory evidence, it is 
impossible to find the source of Fin any one known manuscript. 
At the same time there is nothing to indicate a partial basis 
on any two of them, since some exclusive agreements with 
each of the other closely related texts are found. On the 
contrary, the evidence from all sides combines to show that F 
goes back to y independently of any other known manuvscript. 

C. — Petras, although he showed a close agreement of C 
with A — 52 lines identical and 1296 with similar rimes — 
classed it apart from A, and as only related with it through 
a common O. F. source.^ His own figures, however, as 
Varnhagen has already pointed out, justify quite another 
conclusion ; for it is inconceivable that two independent trans- 
lations from a foreign source should have 52 out of about 
2500 lines identical, or 1300 with like rimes. The rather are 

'See his dissertation, p. 21. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 69 

we to conclude that C is ultimately based on the ultimate 
common original of J, Ar, E, B, F, and belongs with them 
to group Y, 

Of all M. E. texts C is the fullest and, from a literary 
point of view, the most perfect. At the same time it is, with 
the exception of F^ the freest of the texts which comprise Y, 
This freedom, however, does not consist in the changed order 
of stories nor the wholesale mutilation of text which charac- 
terize F ) nor is it violent or spasmodic. It flows from 
an independence or individuality of a much higher type, which 
neither eliminates old motives nor introduces new ones of a 
startling nature, but which contents itself, on the one hand, 
with a slight variation of the episode (generally in the nature 
of additions), on the other, with the enlargement and embellish- 
ment of the often more or less lifeless language of its original, — 
in both cases with the purpose of heightening the poetic effect. 
So that, while we see in A the most important of the M. E. 
texts from an historical vie^vpoint, in Ar the most faithful 
representative of the lost y, we have in C preeminently the 
most perfect jpoem, holding, as it does, in language, style, and 
metre, the first place in the early English group. 

As regards fidelity to the original, as already suggested, C 
does not occupy a very high rank. Its variations, however, 
consist rather in amplification than in invention, as is well 
illustrated by the fact that, while 600 additional lines have 
been interwoven into the text, there are only the following 
noteworthy variations of incident : (1) The step-mother in 
bringing about the prince's downfall seeks counsel and assist- 
ance from a witch (297). (2) In arhor^ the tree with which 
the story deals is a pineapple-t7'ee ; A^ E, By F read pynnote- 
iree, and D, apple-tree, (3) The queen in medicus states that 
it has been twelve years since the Earl of Naverne had visited 
her (1167) ; other texts indefinite. (4) The patient in the same 
story is advised to " Ete beres fless and drink ]>e bro " (1184). 
A, Ar, E, B, " beef's flesh with the broth '' {E, " with the 
blood ") ; L 27, char de buef. (5) There is mention of only 



70 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

two clerks ingaza^ where the remaining English and the French 
texts have seven, five of whom are stationed away from the city 
(1319). (6) In the same story the father alone goes into the 
tower Cressent, while in the other texts both father and son 
go (1340). (7) In tentamina, the history of each of the two 
deceased wives is related separately ; in other texts it is simply 
stated that the husband had survived two wives (1879). (8) 
In the same story, also, it will be noted that only the right 
arm of the wife is bled. (9) In Virgilius, the two brothers them- 
selves fill the two "forcers"; elsewhere theKing has them filled. 
Other variations here are the changed order of incident in 
burying the treasure, and the omission of the name of the 
Emperor (Crassus). (10) There is, in avis, no mention of a 
maid as assisting the faithless wife. (11) The lord of the 
castle in inclusa is playing chess when the knight rides up 
(3294). (12) The son in vaticinium learns of the whereabouts 
of his father through a vision (4135). 

We may judge from this enumeration how faithfully C has 
reproduced the subject-matter of the original. It has altered 
very few details, and none radically, while no single significant 
feature, either from the body or from the end of its stories, 
has been omitted ; at the same time, only an occasional bit of 
detail has been added, — a remarkable showing, indeed, when 
the large increase in the number of lines is considered. 

But there is more specific evidence of C's fidelity to its 
original. There are certain details in which it appears to give 
a more faithful reflex of the Old French than any other M. E. 
text. Thus, in aper, the boar on reaching the tree finds 
" hawes ferly fone" (987) ; cf. L 23, "s'il se merveille mult 
durement de ce qu'il ne pot autretant trover des alies comme 
il soloit faire devant." According to other M. E. versions the 
boar finds no haws at all. Another illustration may be had 
from inclusa, where C (3264) preserves the Hongrie of the 
French (^* 89) as the land into which the knight finally 
comes in search of his lady ; M. E. variants are Pletys in Ar^ 
and Poyle in E, F, and D. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 71 

And there are also instances in which C is in agreement with 
only one other text in its preservation of the French : (1) With 
A in its rendering blanche leuriere {K 2604 ; L 45, only leu- 
ri^re) by gray bitch, where Ar, E, B render greyhound, F 
simply hound. (2) With F in giving, in Roma, the informa- 
tion as to the origin of the word January at the beginning of 
the Janus-episode ; other M. E. versions, where they preserve 
this detail, depart from the O. F. order in placing it at the 
conclusion of the story. 

It is to these facts in the main that we have to resort to 
determine Cs immediate relations ; for the theory of a direct 
translation from the O. F. can no longer be defended in the 
face of the evidence from a comparison of rimes, etc. From 
this comparison it is evident that C is nearly related to the 
other versions of group F. That it cannot have been based on 
any one of them, however, follows from its agreements (just 
cited) with the French where the remaining M. E. texts are 
free. And this also derives confirmation from the features 
which it has exclusively in common with only one M. E. ver- 
sion and the O. F., for neither of the two M. E. versions in 
point here {A and F) can possibly have been its original. 

We have, accordingly, to assume for Can independent basis 
in the lost text y. Whether one or more manuscripts inter- 
vene between Cand y cannot be determined so long as they 
are not forthcoming ; in any case there seems nothing to sup- 
port Yarnhagen's proposition (Fhfig. Stud., X, p. 280) of a 
" miindliche Ueberlieferungsstufe '^ between the two. 

D. — Version D, as compared with the texts so far con- 
sidered, is unique, and cannot be classed with them in group 
Y. Though it is written in the same metre as the remaining 
M. E. versions, and while it preserves, also, the ^-order of 
stories, it differs from each and every text of Y much more 
radically than any one of these differs from any other. And 
so great has this difference seemed that scholars have been 
unanimous in assuming for D an immediate basis in the Old 
French. The thought of a near kinship with any other M. E. 



72 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

version appears never to have been entertained. Wright's 
testimony is to the effect that " The two English metrical 
versions (by which he meant A and D) are altogether different 
compositions ; but .... were evidently translated from the 
same original. . . ." ^ And the views of Petras (p. 44 f.) and 
others are of like import. Scholars without exception seem 
to have blindly accepted Wright^s view, with no effort what- 
ever to test its validity. 

That Wright's assumption is unwarranted, however, may 
be demonstrated, it is believed, beyond question. And it 
will be the purpose of the following pages to make good this 
assertion. With this end in view, we may first bring together 
the chief variations in incident which D exhibits. 

The introduction of D contains no significant alteration 
of the original. A unique feature is the naming of the queen 
Helie (variant JElyCj 223) where the French is silent, but 
where !Fhas the name Milicent (or Ilacent). In not giving a 
name to the prince it falls in with the French ; other M. E. 
texts call him Florentine. There is a slight enlargement in 
the account of the meeting of the father and son, in which 
we have possibly a more faithful preservation of the French 
than in F. Other slight variations are the additional nature- 
touch in having the queen ask to see the prince " In a myry 
mornyng of May" (261), and the requiring the sages to 
come to court within three days after the receipt of the royal 
message (312). 

Arbor preserves all the essential motives of the French. 
A slight abridgment is the omission of mention of the knight's 
going away for the sake of " chaffare " (A, E, B, C, L). 

Canis, on the other hand, contains a number of interesting 
variations : (1) The infant has only two nurses ; in Ay E, By C, 
K, Ly there are threey — cf. L 17, "Li enfes avoit -in. norrices." 
(2) D also fails to catalogue the duties of the nurses, which is 
otherwise a constant feature in both English and French (cf. 
Yy Ky L 17). (3) A third curtailment is the complaint of the 

*8ee the preface to his edition of the D-text, Percy Soc, xvi, p. lxviii. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 73 

knight against women when he finds his child alive. (4) A 
very original addition is that the knight drowns himself for 
sorrow in a Jische-pole in his garden (883) ; L 21 and Fhave 
him go on a pilgrimage by way of atonement. 

Aper exhibits comparative agreement with Y, except in the 
conclusion which has been much abridged. 

The tale medicus is very much condensed. The ton-motif 
is cancelled altogether {L 28 f., A 1142 f.), and there are 
numerous less important omissions: e. g, (1) mention by name 
of the Earl of Navern {Y, L 27, "li quens de Namur '') ; (2) 
the cure of the invalid (F, "beef's flesh/' etc. ; L 27, ''char 
de buef ") ; (3) specific allusion to the prince as an avetrol 
(L 27, avoltreSj — so Y, except F, C read horcopp). A single 
addition is that the queen of Hungary is accompanied by ten 
or twelve maids (1082). 

Gaza, Omissions are (1) the names of both emperor and 
tower [Odavian and Oressent, respectively, in A, Ar, JE, B, O, 
L 30), and (2) the warden's finding the headless body, and his 
endeavor to identify the same, — a feature which is preserved 
and worked out in detail in all other related versions (cf. L 
32 f., A 1319-48). 

Puteus. (1) No mention of the Roman law until late in 
the narrative (1413 f.) ; in other versions it appears at the 
beginning of the story {Y, L 36). (2) This law is not alluded 
to at all as curfew (cf. L 36, coevrefeu). (3) The wife makes 
no threat of drowning herself in the well ( F, X 37). (4) The 
husband's excuse for being out thus late is that he thought he 
heard a spangelj which he had " mysde al thys seven-nyght " 
(1448-9). 

Senescalcus. (1) Much abridgment of the scene between 
the seneschal and his wife on the former's announcing his 
infamous purpose. (2) Abridgment also of the early morning 
scene, notably the dialogue between the king and his seneschal. 
(3) An omitted detail is the bestowing the wife on a rich earl, 
which is found in F, but which seems not to have been in 
the Old French. 



74 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Tenfamina variations are (1) the wife herself contrives the 
^' tentamina." In all the related versions, they are proposed 
by the mother. (2) A brother of the sage assists in the blood- 
letting. Omissions are (1) mention of the sage's having sur- 
vived two wives (cf. L 43 and all M. E. versions except F)^ 
and (2) the wife's third visit to her mother, and the implied 
r6le of the parish-priest of the original and the remaining 
M. E. versions. 

Virgilius. (1) A striking and altogether unwarranted alter- 
ation is the substitution of Merlin for Vergil (1880). (2) 
Allied with this is the very radical variation — probably the 
most radical of all in D — in the omission of the entire first 
episode, the incident of the mirror-pillars alone being preserved. 
Other less striking variations are (3) the two coffers of gold 
are buried, not as in the remaining M. E. versions, at the gates 
of the city, but in " lyttyl pyttys twaye" (1926); (4) the 
emperor is not asked to divide half with the brothers, nor does 
he accompany the latter to their place of digging, but sends 
one of his men with them (1932 f., 1950) ; (5) the brothers set 
fire to the foundation of the pillar before going to their inn, 
and even visit the emperor to bid farewell before taking final 
leave of the city; (6) instead of pouring molten gold down the 
emperor's throat, a ball of gold is ground to powder and his 
eyes, nose, and throat are filled with it (2067-71). 

Avis. Instead of the pie of other texts we have a popynjay 
(2145), and (2) instead of the maid^ a boy as the wife's assist- 
ant. (3) Only the boy goes on the house-top. (4) He breaks 
great blown bladders in imitation of thunder. (5) There is 
no mention of the husband's discovery of the wife's deception. 

Sapientes. Important omissions are the search for, and find- 
ing of, the child Merlin and the incident, dependent thereon, 
of the interpretation of the dream. 

Vidua. (1) An interesting invention is the husband's burial 
" withouten the toun at a chapel " (2484), since, in view of 
the manner in which he met his death, "In kyrkejarde men 
wolde hym nout delve " (2482) ; ^* 80, simply au moustier. (2) 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 75 

The wife herself kindles the fire and makes her bed beside the 
grave (2502 f.), having first sent after her clothes (2500). (3) 
The knight is permitted to enter immediately on knocking ; 
in other texts, he has to repeat his knocking and petitions. 
(4) The wife does not, as in other texts, propose matrimony 
to the knight. 

Roma. (1) There are three heathen kings instead of seven 
as in the original (2649). (2) The page is not named till 
towards the end of the story, when he is called Gynever (2730); 
cf. J.* S6, Genus; A, B, C, F, Gemes; E, B^ Junyus; Ar. 
Julius. 

Inclusa. This story presents remarkable agreement with 
Y, the chief and only important variation being the temporary 
omission of the knight's explanation of the reason for his flight 
from his native land in that he had slain there another knight. 
This excuse is employed later in the story, but originates with 
the lady (2961). 

Vaticinium. (1) The father also has the power of inter- 
preting the language of birds (3138). (2) The name of the 
father is omitted (^* 101, ^4919, Girart le fils Thierri; B, 
(7, -F, Jerrard Noryes sone; E, Barnarde Norysshe)^ and there 
is otherwise much condensation of the narrative. 

Such are some of the variations of D. And these are doubt- 
less what led Wright to his classification of this version. But 
since all these variations are peculiar to D they can in no way 
be held to confirm Wright's view. They are in fact of no 
value whatever in determining i)'s relations, except in so far 
as they put one on guard against laying too much stress on 
any agreements which D may be found to have exclusively in 
common with any particular group or version. 

Wright's theory, however, does seem to derive some sup- 
port from another quarter, namely that D, in a number of 
instances, preserves the Old French more faithfully than any 
other M. E. version.^ These are as follows: (1) In senesealciis, 
the king rules in Apulia (so L 39) ; in Y, he rules over both 

^Wright, however, has not adduced any of this evidence. 



76 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Apulia and Calabria. (2) In sapientes, after all the sages 
have been slain and the cauldron has become clear, Merlin and 
Herod ride out of the city by way of testing results ; the king, 
on reaching the gate, regains his sight {D 2409 f , L 63). 
Other M. E. texts omit this feature. A less significant agree- 
ment of D with the Old French in the same story is that the 
king remains blind from the time he goes outside the city 
gates, where F represents him as being blind only when with- 
out the city, and as always recovering his sight on his return. 
(3) D 2803, ^* 89 have the knight in indusa travel three 
weeks in a fruitless search for the lady of his dream. Ar^ E, 
CJ F have him travel three months , — B, one month} (4) In 
vaticinium, the father and the son, at the beginning of the 
story, are on their way to visit a hermit on an island in the 
sea (3141 f.). This feature is suppressed in the remaining M. 
E. versions, but appears in all the important O. F. versions ; 
^* 98, " por aler a -i- reclus qui estoit seur -i- rochier,'' and 
J?' 4693-4, " Naiant en vont a un renclus, ki en un rochier ses- 
toit mis." (5) In the same story (3327), the city to which 
the father comes in his poverty, is, in agreement with ^* 101, 
Plecie (cf. also iir4918, "Ales moi tost au plaseis/' — which 
Godefroy identifies with plaisseis == cloture). The city is not 
named in Y. 

Of these agreements two (the 2d and 4th) are very signifi- 
cant, and serve at least to show that D was not based on the 
common original {y) of the six versions so far treated. They 
do not prove, however, that D goes back to the French unre- 
lated with these, for there still remains the possibility of a 
connection of D with y through a common M. E. original (ic), 
which y does not for these features faithfully reproduce. Yet 
it must be granted that this explanation would seem to 
have little in its favor could not some agreements of D 
with certain members of Fas against the French be shown. 

^ The Italian prose text published by Varnhagen agrees here with the 
M. E. versions ; see p. 36, tre mesi. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 77 

Among these agreements are : (1) with A and C, in canis, 
in that the knight cuts out the dog's rygge-boon (D 859) ; in 
the French, he cuts off his head (L 20, " si li cope la teste '^) ; 
(2) in ape?^, with C, in that the herd fills his hood with haws 
(D 945), A, E, B, L, his laps; (3) in Virgilius, with the entire 
group Y, in that there are only two brothers who bring about 
the overthrow of the image (D 1899) ; L 51, on the contrary, 
"•III. bachelers"; (4) in vidua, with F, A"^ 84, in that the 
wife is called on to knock out only two of her husband's teeth 
(D 2592) ; according to A, Ar, E, B, (7, all are knocked out; 
see also D* 39, toutes les dens; (5) in inclusa, (a) w^ith the 
entire group F, in the substitution of Hungary for the Mon- 
bergier of A* 89, K, as the land whence the knight comes (D 
2787), (b) with E, F in the substitution of Poyle for the 
illogical Hungary of the French (J.* 89, K) as the land into 
which the knight finally comes (D 2805), and (c) with F in 
the additional detail, that the earl had been warred against 
for two years {D 2849). 

But here it is possible that these agreements were accidental. 
Furthermore, inasmuch as the ultimate O. F. original of the 
M. E. versions has in all probability been lost,^ it may be 
argued that those features in . which D and other M. E. 
versions are in accord as contrasted with the Old French may 
have been just those in which their common original varied 
from the known O. F. manuscripts. Hence no final conclu- 
sion may be had from this quarter. 

There remains the evidence of phraseology and of rime, and 
it is in this that we have a final proof of the error of Wright's 
assumption. 

The following are some of the parallel passages revealed by 
a comparison of A and E with D.^ Others might be cited, 
but these will suffice for the purpose. 

^ See the section devoted to a study of the source of the M. E. versions. 
' Where A is fragmentary, E has been selected in preference to Ar, since 
the latter is also largely fragmentary. 



78 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



D. E. 

In Rome was an emperour, Sum tyme here was an Emperoure, 

A man of swjth raikil honur. That ladde bys lyfe witA moche 

Is name was Deocclicius. honowre. 

Hys name was Dioclician. 

(1-2, 4) (3-5) 

Uppon his sone that was so bolde, The chylde wax to -vii- yere olde. 

And was hot sevene wyntur olde. Wyse of speche ande dedys bolde. 

(13-14) (15-16) 

The emperour for-thoght sore Hys ffadyr was olde and ganne to 

Tha the child ware sette to lore. hoore, 

His sone thoo he sette to lore. 

(15-16) (19-20) 

Whilk of thaym he myght take To hem he thought his sone take 

Hys sone a wyes man to make. Forto knowe the letters blacke. 

(23-24) (23-24) 

The thirde a lene man was. The -iii- mayster was a lyght man. 

(49) (51) 

And was callid Lentulus. His name was callyd lentyllous. 

Hee sayed to the emperour thus. He sayde a-non to the kyng. 

(51-2) (54-5) 

And er ther passe thre and fyve, Uppon payne of lemys and lyfe, 

Yf he have wyt and his on lyve, I shalle teche hym in yerys -v. 

(55-6) (59^0) 

And inred man he was, The -iiii- mayster a redman was. 

And was callid Maladas. Men hym callyd Malquydras. 

(61-^) " (61-62) 

The sevent mayister answerd thus, The -vii- mayster hette Maxious, 

And was hoten Marcius. A ryght wyse man and a vertuous. 

(91-2) (99-100) 

D. A, 

Evermore wil he wooke. Whan o maister him let, another him 
When on levede, anoihir tooke. tok; 

He was ever upon his bok. 
(159-60) (189-90) 

By God, maister, I am noght dronken, Other ich am of wine dronke, 

Yf the rofe his nougt sonken. Other the firmament is i-sonke. 

(209-10) (211-2) 

Hym byfel a harde caes. Ac sone hem fil a ferli cas. 

(222) (222) 

And to have anothir wyf, Ye libbeth an a lenge lif : 

For to ledde with thy lif. Ye sholde take a gentil wif. 

(231-2) (227-8) 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



79 



A good childe and a faire, 
That sal be oure bothe ayere. 
For sothe, sire, I hold hym myn, 
Also wel as thou dost thyn. 

(267-70) 
Than sayd mayster Baudllas, 
"For soth this his wondir cas: 
Tharefore take counsel sone 
What his best to don, 
The childe answerd ther he stood, 
" 1 wyle gyf 50U counsel good ; 
Seven dayes I mot forbere 
That I ne gyf no answere ; 

(360-3, 368-71) 
I schal saue thy lyf a daye. 

(381) 
Thus they were at on alle, 
And wenten agayen into the halle. 

(388-9) 
By hym that made sone and mone, 
He ne hade nevere with me done. 

(464-5) 
" Kys me, yf thy wylle bee, 
Alle my lyfe hys longe on the." 

(474-5) 
Callid to him a tormentour. 

(509) 
Also mote bytide the 
As dyde the fyne appul-tre. 

(582-3) 
Than sayde Baucillas, 
"A ! sire emperour, alas ! " 

(688-9) 
And hir clothes al to-rent, 
Afte the thef wold hir have shent. 

(700-1) 
That knave kest hym frnyt y-nowe. 
And clam a-doune fra bough to boghe. 

(972-3) 
And rent hys wombe with the knyf, 
And bynam the bore hys lyf. 

(982-3) 
"A! sire," quod mayster Ancilles, 
" God almighty send us pees ! " 

(1018-9) 



Hit is thi sone, and thin air; 
A wis child, and a fair. 
For thi sone I tel mine, 
Alse wel als tou dost thine. 

(283-4, 289-90) 
Than seide master Bancillas 
Here is now a ferli cas I 
Counseil we al herupon ; 
How that we mai best don. 
Than seide the schild, Saunz fail, 
Ich you right wil counseil. 
This seven daies I n'el nowt speke; 
Nowt a word of mi mowht breke; 

(371-8) 
I schal the waranti o dai. 

(389) 
With this word, thai ben alle 
Departed, and comen to halle. 

(401-2) 
I swere hi sonne and bi mone 
With me ne hadde he never to done. 

(451-2) 
Kes me, leman, and loue me, 
And I thi soget wil i-be. 

(457-8) 
And cleped forht a turmentour. 

(498) 
Ase wel mot hit like the 
Als dede the pinnote tre. 

(543-4) 
Than seide maister Bancillas, 
Sire, that were now a sori cas. 

(683-4) 
Th' emperour saide, I fond hire to- 
rent: 
Hire her, and hire face i-sclient ; 

(689-90) 
He kest the bor doun hawes anowe 
And com himself doun bi a bowe. 

(921-2) 
The herd thous with his long knif 
Biraft the bor of his lif. 

(933-4) 
Than saide maister Ancilles, 
For Godes love, sire, hold thi pes. 

(977-8) 



80 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



That 56 bytyde swilk a cas 

As bytyde Ypocras, 

That slow hys cosyn withouten gylt. 

(1026-8) 
With my lordefor Lo play, 
And love wax bytwen us twey. 

(1100-1) 
Oppou a day thay went to pleye, 
He and hys cosyn thay twey. 

(1118-9) 
And mad hym myry, and spendid 

faste, 
Al the wylle that hit wolde laste. 
He that lokyd the tresour, 
Come a day into the tour. 

(1220-3) 
Bot hastilich smy t of my hede. 

(1255) 
Byfore the dore, as I 50W telle, 
Thare was a mykyl deppe welle. 

(1381-2) 
To do thy wyl by a-night, 
Yf I schal helle the aryght. 

(1546-7) 
Now he slakys to lygge above ; 
I wyl have another love. 

(1686-7) 
Er the myrrour be broght a-doune, 
And than gyf us oure warrysoun. 

(1906-7) 
And sayed, we wyte, sire emperour, 
About this cite gret tresour. 

(1932-3) 
And dolvyn a lytyl withinne the 

grounde, 
And the tresour was sone founde. 

(1952-3) 
The ton sayed, sire emperour, 
Undir the pyler that berys merour. 

(2002-3) 
Gladlich, sayed scho, 
The bettyr yf hyt wylle bee. 

(2287-8) 
And hadde seven clerkys wyse, 

(2293) 



On the falle swich a cas 
Als fil on Ypocras the gode clerk, 
That slow his neveu with fals werk. 
(994-6) 
With mi louerdfor to plai ; 
And so he dede, mani a dai. 

(1083-4) 
So bifel upon a dai 
He and his neveu yede to plai. 

(1113-4) 
And beren hit horn wel on hast, 
And maden hem large whiles hit 

last. 
Amorewe aros that sinatour, 
And sichen to-bregen his louerdes 
tour. 

(1265-8) 
And hastiliche gird of min heved. 

(1299) 
But thou me in lete, ich wille telle, 
Ich wille me drenchen in the welle. 

(1463-4) 
Have womman to pleie aright, 
Yif ye wil be hoi aplight. 

(1577-8) 
Ich moste have som other love ! 
Nai, dowter, for God above ! 

(1753-4) 
Who might that ymage fel adoun, 
He wolde him yif his warisoun. 

(2029-30) 
And said, al hail, sir emperour ! 
It falleth to the to lof tresour. 

(2049-50) 
And ther thai doluen in the gronde; 
A riche forcer ther thai founde. 

(2079-80) 
Than saide the elder to the emperour, 
Under the ymage that halt the mirour. 
(2091-2) 
Bletheliche, sire, so mot ich the, 
So that ye wolde the better be. 

(2337-8) 
He hadde with him seven wise. 

(2343) 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 



81 



Who so anny swevene by nyght, 
O morne when the day was bryght. 

(2296-7) 
The eraperour and Merlyn anoon 
Into the chambyr thay gonne gone; 
(2339-40) 
Hyt was a knyght, a riche schyreve, 
That was lot hys wyf to greve. 
He sate a daye by hys wyf, 
And in hys honde helde a knyf. 

(2471-4) 
Bot sayed for non world lys wyne 
Schulde no man parte hom a-twyne. 

(2487-8) 
In hyr hoond scho took a stoon, 
And knockyd out twa teth anoon ! 



(2601-2) 



D. 



Made to fle with hys boste 
Thre kyngys and hare hoste. 

(2732-3) 
The knyght that met that sweven at 

nyght 
Of that lady was so bright, . . . 
Kyght a lytyl fram the toure 
Thare was the lady of honour, 
And ate the wyndow the lady he see. 
(2822-3, 2826-7, 2831) 
He bytoke undyr hys bond. 
And made hym stywarde of al hys londe. 
Oppon a day he went to playe, 
Undir the tour he made hys waye. 



(2869-72) 
Lenand to the mykyl toure. 
To do in hys tresour. 
Thorow a q weyntyse he thout to wyne 
The lady that was loke there-inne. 



(2895-8) 



That who that mette a sweven anight, 
He scholde come amorewe, aplight. 
(2349-50) 
The emperour him ladde anon, 
Into his chaumbre of lim and ston; 

(2453-4) 
Sire, he saide, thou might me leue, 
Hit was a knight, a riche scherreue, 
So, on a dai, him and his wif 
Was i-youen a newe knif ; 

(2563-4, 2569-70) 
The leuedi saide, for no Avenne, 
Sche ne wolde neuer wende thenne. 

(2581-2) 
Than wil ich, she saide, and tok a 

ston, 
And smot hem out euerichon. 

(2713-4) 



E. 



And made more noyse and boste 
Thenne wolde a kyng and hys hoste. 
(2812-3) 
And soo there come rydyng thys 

knyght 
That had sought the lady bryghte. 
He lokyd uppe into the toure. 
And say that lady as white as flowre ; 
And anon, as he hyr say, 

(2914-8) 
And toke hym hys goodys in-to hys 

hande. 
And made hym stywarde ouyr alle hys 

lande. 
So oppon a day, wit^ moche honoure, 
The knyght come playnge by the 

toure. 

(2944-7) 
To make a chambyr byfore the toure 
That may ben for my honoure. 
Thenne thought he uppon sum quent 

gynne 
Howe he myght to that lady wynne. 
(2962-3, 2968-9) 



82 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Oppon a day stylle as stoon The knjght toke workemen a-non, 

He sent eftyr masons anoon. And made a chambyr of lyme and 

ston. 

(2901-2) (2966-7) 

And sate stille and made hym glade, And bade hym ete and be glad, 

And thus hys wyf made hym made. And euyr he sat as he were mad. 

(3021-2) (3110-1) 

Into Plecie when he was comen, Amorowe the kyng thedyr came, 

Ner hysfadir hys in was nome. And with hysfadyr hys in he name. 

To mete when he was redy to gon, He and hys baronys euerychone 

After hys fadir he sent anoon. Wente to mete wit^ hym a-non. 

(3336-9) (3473-6) 

It is impossible to account for these agreements as mere 
coincidences, or as flowing from a translation from the same 
O. F. source. Some of them may indeed be, and doubtless 
are, due to the often stereotyped style, or the fondness for like 
epithets or collocations which characterize the M. E. romance ; 
but all of them cannot be so explained. They warrant this 
assumption alone, that D and y are related either through 
the derivation of one from the other, or through a common 
M. E. original. 

And inasmuch as D cannot have been based on y or on any of 
the texts which have developed from it, since in all the latter 
some of the O. F. features are lacking which are preserved in 
Dj — or, conversely, y on Z), in view of the very many inde- 
pendent variations of the latter where y is faithful to the 
French, we can only conclude that both y and D go back to 
the same lost M. E. version x. 

We may accordingly sum up our results as to D as follows : 

(1) it is remarkably free, and exhibits many unique variations; 

(2) it does not represent an independent translation from the 
French, but is connected with at least six other M. E. versions 
through a common M. E. source ; (3) this source was not the 
same as the more immediate common original of these six 
versions (y), but was a version one or more stages nearer the 
Old French. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 83 

As. — The Asloan version is at present inaccessible in the 
original manuscript/ and, as only about 200 lines of it have 
been printed/ any discussion of its relations must be very 
unsatisfactory. We may be permitted, however, to bring to- 
gether the few facts which are known about it, and to draw 
from these such conclusions as their evidence may justify. 

From the descriptions which have appeared, it is established 
that As, so far as it is not fragmentary, preserves the usual 
M. E. order of stories, but that beyond this it is, in many respects, 
extremely free. The names of the sages are much garbled, 
and they vary in the introductory enumeration from their 
form in the stories themselves. They are, moreover, in no 
case close to those of any version now in print, or to those of 
the remaining M. E. manuscripts. 

Avis, too, the story which has been printed, exhibits very 
radical variation from other versions, both textually and as 
regards incident. There are apparent no significant agree- 
ments in rime or phraseology with any other M. E. version, 
while two new episodes,^ well-known in other collections, but 
otherwise foreign to the Seven Sages, are woven into the narra- 
tive. And there are other variations, besides, such as the intro- 
duction of the wife's mother as a go-between, and mention of 
the burgess's name — first Annahill, later Balan. 

But none of these serves to shed any light on the question 
of relationship. All the new features of As, as compared with 
the remaining M. E. versions and the accessible Romance ver- 
sions, are peculiar to it, and hence afford no grounds for deter- 
mining its connections. 

'As already stated in my " Word of Introduction" (p. 2), Lord Talbot de 
Malahide declined to permit my consulting this manuscript. His reasons 
for doing so are, I understand, the same as those given by certain other 
possessors of valuable M. E. manuscripts, for which I beg to refer to Dr. 
Furnivall, Temporary Pref. to the Six-Text Ed., Chaucer Soc, 1868, Pt. I, p. 6. 

' In a contribution by Prof. Varnhagen (Englisehe Studien, xxv, p. 
321 f.), who will edit the text for the Scottish Text Society. 

' See Englisehe Studien, xxv, p. 322. 



84 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Prof. Varnhagen claims that As was made directly from 
some O. F. version/ and the lack of textual agreement between 
it and other M. E. versions in the story avis may seem to offer 
some support to this view, — but by no means necessarily, since 
it is evident that the author of As worked very independently.^ 
And that the evidence offered by Varnhagen in support of his 
claim, viz., the agreement in order of stories with the O. F. 
J[*-type, is not adequate, he himself, I believe, will concede 
on reconsideration. 

3. Authorship of the Middle English Versions, 

It has been assumed in the preceding chapter that the Eng- 
lish original [x) of the seven M. E. manuscripts A, Ar, E, B, Ej 
Cy and D, has been lost. It remains to inquire when, where, 
and by whom this original was made. For this purpose we 
unfortunately have almost no data at all, and can only resort 
to indirections to find directions out. 

(1) For the determining the date of x the Auchinleck MS. 
{A) is of first importance. This manuscript dates from around 
the year 1330 ; this, then, must be the superior limit for the 
dating of y. And since, as has been shown, A was not derived 
directly from y^ but rests in all probability on a lost manuscript 
r, which may have been based on y directly or through an inter- 
vening manuscript, and since, moreover, it is highly credible 
that A had already been composed some time before the Auch- 
inleck copy was made, it is not probable that the date of y 
would fall later than the beginning of the fourteenth century. 

And inasmuch, now, as 2/ cannot have been this parent version, 
since D, though closely akin to it, was neither based immedi- 
ately on it nor on any of its derivatives, but was connected with 
it through a common source, which source we may assume to 
be either identical with, or based directly on, the translation 

^ Ibid., XXV, p. 322. 

' F offiers even more radical variation from other M. E. versions in some 
of its stories than does As in avis. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 85 

from the French, it is necessary to assign to this parent ver- 
sion a date before the year 1300. The year 1275 would, it 
is believed, represent a conservative conjecture. 

(2) Available material for determining the place of transla- 
tion of this parent text is somewhat more satisfactory. Of the 
entire group of seven versions which have been shown to be 
based on a;, only one is in the Northern dialect, and this (C) 
is of comparatively late date. One other (D) belongs to the 
south-east Midland, while the rest {Ay Ar, E, B, F) belong to 
the South, — a fact which well justifies the assumption that x 
was also Southern. Furthermore, inasmuch as three of these 
versions {A, Ar, E) possess marked Kentish features, and two 
others [B, F) show a Kentish influence, but less marked, we 
seem justified in a further restriction to the eastern South — 
Kent or its neighborhood — as the home of the parent text. It 
is further confirmatory of this view that just those versions 
{Ar, E) which are most faithful to x are most distinctly 
Kentish.^ 

(3) But while we are thus justified in indulging in conject- 
ure as to the time and place of composition of x^ in the mat- 
ter of its authorship we have no grounds for such an indulgence. 
The nature of the subject might establish a slight probability 
in favor of lay authorship, but not at all necessarily ; and the 
same is true of the references to priests, in tentamina and avisy 
as adulterate lovers, — especially since in the only story in 
which it is a constant feature (tentamina), it was also in the 
Old French ; so that, in respect to this side of the problem 
in hand, we have, for the present at least, and probably for all 
time, to content us with absolute ignorance. 

With regard to the authorship of the texts which have been 
preserved, we are equally at a loss for definite information. 

An ingenious and praiseworthy effort has been made by Dr. 
Kolbing to demonstrate a community of authorship for the 
A'text and the Auchinleck texts of the Arthur and Mei'lin, 

*The dialect of i)— southeast Midland — also offers support to this view. 



86 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

Kyng Alisaunder, and Richard Coer de Lion ; ^ but without 
meaning to discredit his conclusions in general, it is necessary, 
we regret to say, to reject them in so far as they concern the 
Seven Sages. Kolbing's argument is made on the basis of 
features (rime, language, etc.) exclusively, or almost exclu- 
sively, peculiar to these poems. The only part of his argu- 
ment which holds is that which concerns the expletives cert 
and vair. These appear only in the JL-text, being either orig- 
inal with it, or, if in y, having been displaced in the remaining 
texts by other rimes. On the other hand, of the 18 rimes 
which Kolbing cites ^ (one of which, 2803-4, hataille: mer- 
vaile, should be cancelled, since it is taken from C), a com- 
parison with the remaining members of I^shows 12 to reappear 
in the corresponding lines in Ar, 9 in E, etc. The evidence 
to which Kolbing attaches most importance, that of certain 
textual agreements between Arthur and Merlin (1201 f.) and 
A (2389 f.),^ is likewise not valid, as is manifest from the 
following parallel comparison of these passages with Ar and 
E. Compare 

* Merlin in >e strete ]>o pleyd, ' On a dai )?ai com ber Merlin pleid, 
And on of his felawes him trayd.' And on of his felawes- him traid.' 

{A. M. 1201-2). {A 2389-90). 

with 

* So )>ei come )?eir )>e child played, ' Thenne come they thorowe happe 
And on of his felawes hym by trayed.' there he playde, 

One of his felowys hym myssayde.' 
{Ar 1511-2). (£: 2437-8). 

Compare further, as against his citation of 

*Foule schrewe fram ous go ! ' 'And cleped him schrewe faderles.' 

* pou hast yseyd to loude |>i roun.' 'Al to loude J>ou spok bi latin.' 

pat hat> me sougt al ^is ger.' * pat han me sought al fram Rome.' 

{A. M. 1204, 18, 20). {A 2392, 6, 8). 

^Arthur and Merlin, Leipzig, 1890, p. LX f. 

* Jbid., p. Lxxxii. ^ Ibid., p. civ. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 87 

the following from Ar and E : 

'And clepyd hym schrewe faderlese.' 'And calde the chylde fadyrles.' 

' To loude >ou spake \>y latyn.' 

* pat haue me sougt fro gret Rome.' ' That have sought me fro Rome.' 

(^r 1514, 18, 20). (^2440,6). 

From these it is evident that any inference as to A^s author- 
ship made on this basis will apply equally as well to ^r and 
E, Accordingly the parallels pointed out by Kolbing must 
either be explained as accidental, or as traceable either to an 
influence of Arthur and Merlin on the source of Aj Ar, and E, 
or, conversely, of some one of these on the Arthur and Merlin. 

4. Source of the Middle English Versions, 

The question of the ultimate source of the M. E. versions 
has, to all intents and purposes, been settled by Petras.^ We 
need only present here his general argument and his conclu- 
sion, inserting where deemed expedient additional proofs, and 
adding here and there details which he has omitted. 

But first of all it is necessary to state that such expressions 
(which Petras [p. 32] inclines to accept as evidence) as A 2771, 
'So seigh ];e rime'^ (to which add jP1690, 'as sey}> )?e ryme^) 
proves nothing, for by a like reasoning we might, on the basis 
of Ar 1906, * as it sai]; in latyn,' prove a Latin source for the 
M. E. versions. It is not on such formulae that the pre- 
sumption in favor of a metrical original of the lost M. E. 
original must repose; this must rather rest on the fact that 

^ See his dissertation, p. 31 f. Our investigation must differ from his, 
however, in that we are concerned only with the source of the parent ver- 
sion, X {As being disregarded), while Petras has assumed each of four ver- 
sions {A, C, F, JD) to be independent translations from the P'rench. Since, 
however, he begins with the assumption that the same O. F. version was 
the source of all these, his argument is essentially the same as ours. 

'References to source in the M. E. versions are numerous: A 317, 1245, 
2766, 2770; Ar 1900, 1906, 2206, 2261, 2442; ^1253, 2779,2784, 3445; 
B 295, 1235 ; F92S, 1683, 1690, 1973 ; C 622, 1324 ; D 1385, 1520, 2690, 
2922. 



88 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

this original (x) was itself in verse, and, hence probably made 
from a metrical text, — and that this does not permit of any 
definite conclusion it is hardly necessary to add. 

It is not improbable, however, that this original of x was, 
like itself, composed of octosyllabic couplets, and it is needless 
to state that it was in the French language. 

There exist three O. F. metrical versions, — the DolopathoSy 
the Keller text {K), and the fragmentary version C*. The 
first of these, the DolopathoSj must, for obvious reasons, play 
no part in this investigation. The unique version D* should, 
however, since it represents a prosing of a lost metrical ver- 
sion, receive equal attention with ^and (7*.^ 

The only one of this group which has ever been proposed 
as a possible source of the M. E. versions is K; but a com- 
parison of the two types as regards order of stories ^ reveals a 
considerable difference between them, only ten stories (1, 2, 4, 
6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15) having the same position in each. 
Such a comparison, however, while bearing with it much 
weight, can in no wise be accepted as determining, as it would 
be quite natural for the redactor, or even the translator, to 
change about the stories at will, either with artistic purpose or 
with a view to making his source less apparent. Hence the 
safest test of relationship should be from the consideration of 
content, rather than of order of stories. And it is on this basis 
that Petras's comparison has been made. The Cotton- Auchin- 
leck (C-A), or Weber, text he finds to contain only 4G0 lines 
which could be possible translations from the Keller text.' 
And since the latter contains over 5000 lines, it is not probable 
that even numerous intermediate redactions could have made 
such a difference. Besides this, there are many variations in 
incident, all which unite in making it extremely improbable 
that K was used by the English translator. 

* P'or the Bolopathos, K, C*, and D^, see the chapter on " The Romance 
in France and Italy." 

' For the order of stories in the various sub-types of the Western group, 
see our comparative table on page 35. 

^See p. 33 of his dissertation. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 89 

The fragmentary text (7*, though differing somewhat from 
^in order of stories, seems, nevertheless, to be much nearer 
to it than it is to the English. 

The prose version Z)*, representing a lost metrical version 
Vf exhibits still less agreement with the M. E. type, and 
possesses many unique features. In the content of its stories, 
however, it is comparatively close to K^ so that in denying 
the claims for it, the legitimacy of any claim for Z)* is also 
denied. 

K, C*, and i)* having been eliminated from the problem, it 
is necessary to conclude that the O. F. original, if metrical, 
has been lost. It remains to show whether or not the M. E. 
parent text was based on any of the prose texts which have 
come down to us, or, at least, which one of them nearest 
approximates the lost original. 

The most widely known of the prose versions, the Historian 
must be ruled out at once, since Paris has shown that the 
earliest date which can be given it is around the year 1330, 
or some time after the composition of the derivative M. E. 
version A. Other circumstances, such as the order of stories, 
the introduction of amatores, and the amicws-legend, as well 
as the fusion of Roma and senescalcus, together with its many 
modern touches, all unite in invalidating any claim for H. 

The Scala Coeli (8) also exhibits many features at variance 
with the M. E. type, and its two new stories, filia and novercaj 
are sufficient to exclude it from the list of possibilities. 

Likewise the first Leroux de Lincy (L) version, although 
it agrees very closely with the Middle English versions for 
the first eleven stories, cannot be considered their source, 
since it also contains the stories filia and noverca, 

Nor to the Versio Italica does there attach any more proba- 
bility, its distinguishing feature — the reversal of the order 
of stories — finding no parallel even in French. 

There remains group J.*, or the family represented by the 
second text of the Leroux de Lincy edition. A presumption 
in favor of some member of this family is at once established 



90 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

in the fact that it has the same order of stories as the M. E. 
group. This circumstance has led Paris and others to see in 
this group the source of the M. E. texts, but no explicit claim 
has been made as to which one of the JL*-manuscripts served 
as this original, though Petras has made a detailed investiga- 
tion with a view to arriving at some definite conclusion.^ 

The results which Petras reaches,^ however, are wholly 
negative. He shows in the first place that MS. 6849 [new 
No. 189] of the Bibliotheque Nationale, which Ellis had 
suggested as the probable source of the M. E. versions, is not 
even a possible source, but belongs to group L, He next 
endeavors to show that the Leroux de Lincy text of J.* (the 
only one of the O. F. manuscripts of this type yet published) 
is not as close to the M. E. versions as are some of the 
unpublished manuscripts belonging to this family. Among 
the latter, he finds the MS. 4096, Laval. 13, to be nearest 
to the M. E. versions ; thus, by way of illustration, where L, 
-^* call the seventh sage Merons, this manuscript names him 
Meceneus, which approximates the M. E. Maxencius much 
more closely. Despite this fact, however, he is not willing to 
concede that this text was the source of the M. E. group, but 
maintains that the latter had its basis in a lost manuscript 
which is connected with the former through a common lost 
source. 

And in this conclusion Petras is probably correct, — and 
assuredly so as regards the Leroux de Lincy text, as is estab- 
lished by certain features, which are not in ^*, but which the 
M. E. texts have in common with ^and other O. F. versions. 
A few of these are the following : (1) in tentaminaj A, (7 read 
gray bitch = K 2604, blanche leuriere; i (^* 45), only une 
leurib-c] (2) in Virgilius^ L (^* 51) has lost the feature of 
VergiPs casting images also for the east and west gates of 
Eome, which has been preserved in K 3960 f. and the M. E. 
group ; (3) in vaticiniurtij the child, when discovered alone on 
the island, has had nothing to eat for four days in E^ J5, (7, 

» Petras, p. 37 f. »76id, p. 44. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 91 

and K4725; J.* 99 and i)*, only three days. These suffice 
to indicate the result which would follow from a detailed 
comparison. 

In view of this conclusion, the problem of the source of the 
M. E. parent text must, so far as a specific source is con- 
cerned, remain for the present unsolved. Examination of all 
^*-manuscripts will doubtless bring us nearer to the truth, 
and, it is hoped, settle the question. 



II (6.) Sixteenth Century and Chap-booh Versions. 

Under this head fall the Wynkyn de Worde version and 
the many chap-books founded on it, the lost Copland text, and 
the Kolland metrical version, — all which fall together into one 
distinct group apart from the M. E. group. 

1. The Wynkyn de Worde text is in prose. Its date is not 
definitely known ; in the British Museum catalogue it is 
entered as 1520, though Hazlitt (Handbook, p. 660) gives it 
a dating fifteen years earlier. Only one copy of the original 
text has been preserved, and that is imperfect. A reprint 
made by Gomme for the Villon Society (1885) makes the text 
accessible.^ 

This version seems to have been the first prose version made 
in English, and, as already noted, it can in no way be related 
with the M. E. metrical versions which antedate it. In length 
alone the contrast is sufficiently striking to justify a serious 
doubt as to any immediate relationship between them, the 
prose version comprising 180 pages in Gomrae's edition. It 
is based on some member of the Historia family — probably a 
Latin ^ rather than an O. F. text. As a translation of H it 



^The History of the S. W. M. of Rome, London, 1885. A few pages missing 
from the Wynkyn de Worde text are supplied from a chap-book version 
printed in 1671. 

^ Graesse enumerates a half-dozen or more prints between 1483 and 1495, 
any one of which may have served as the basis of this version. 



92 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

IS comparatively close, though it abridges at times, and also 
makes occasional independent additions.^ 

2. The Wynkyn de Worde edition served as the basis of a 
second prose edition, attributed to the printer Copland, which 
has been lost. The superscription to this edition, which alone 
has been preserved, agrees almost word for word with that 
of the Wynkyn de Worde edition, and it is more than 
probable, as Buchner suggests,^ that it is only a reprint of it. 
The date of the Copland text is variously placed between 1548 
and 1561. 

3. The Holland version is a very long poem written in 
heroic couplets, and in the Scottish dialect. The original edi- 
tion bears the date 1578, but Laing has shown it to be probable 
that its composition dates from the year 1560. It seems to 
have been very popular in its day, undergoing at least five 
editions (1590, 1592, 1599, 1606, 1620) in little more than 
half a century after its first publication. A modern reprint 
was edited by Laing for the Baunatyne Club in 1837. 

Sundry conjectures as to the source which Rolland employed 
have been made. Laing maintained that he used either the 
Copland print, or some O. F. or Latin text of H. Petras, 
who did not know of the Wynkyn de Worde version, and who 
makes the RoUand version his "Redaction C," investigated 
the question at some length,^ and concluded in favor of the 
O. F. translation of H as Rolland^s original.'' But that 
neither of these views is correct, and that the Rolland text 
was the rather based on the Wynkyn de Worde version, has 
been conclusively proved by Buchner in his dissertation in the 
Ih'langer Beitrdge, v, p. 93 f. This he established by show- 
ing that where there are differences between the three versions — 
H (either Latin or French), the Wynkyn de Worde, and the 
Rolland — the last two are in almost every instance in accord 

. ^ See Buchner, Erlang. Beilr.y v, p. 95. 

*Erlang. Beitr.y V, p. 96. ' See his dissertation, p. 47 f. 

* The second text of Paris's Deux Redactions. Its date is 1492, 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 93 

with each other. A large number of textual parallels be- 
tween the two English versions are cited in further support 
of this. 

(4) The English chap-book versions merit but little atten- 
tion. They have been numerous, but of poor quality, the 
later versions especially having deteriorated from the original. 
In some of these, new stories have been introduced, and in 
almost all of them the old stories have been abridged — in 
some of them, so as to be scarcely more than epitomes of their 
prototypes. That they were very popular for a long time, 
however, is indicated by the fact that the British Museum 
alone contains at least twelve various prints, one of which 
purports to have reached its twenty-fifth edition. Another 
was published at Boston in 1794, — the most recent at War- 
rington in 1815. 

All versions of the chap-book group contain the distinctive 
features of H. They doubtless go back to the Wynkyn de 
Worde, or to the Copland, text. 

In addition to the four versions or groups already described, 
there is evidence that there once existed another sixteenth cen- 
tury version, which, like the Copland text, has not survived. 
This is a dramatic version, bearing the title The Seven Wise 
Masters of Rome, which is mentioned in Henslowe's Diary ^ as 
having been made by Dekker, Chettle, Haughton, and Day, 
and as having been acted at London in March, 1599-1600. 
No later notice of its presentation has been pointed out, how- 
ever, and it is altogether probable that the work was lost 
without undergoing publication.^ 

^ Ed. Collier, London, 1845, pp. 165, 167. See also the Dramatic Works 
of Dekker, ed. Shepherd, London, 1873, i, p. xii. 

' The enumeration of the late English versions should also include refer- 
ence at least to the Seven Wise Mistresses of Rome, a chap-book modelled 
after the chap-book version of the Seven Wise Masters of Rome, and a sort of 
counterpart to it. The English libraries contain several versions of this 
type, but, though very interesting, they possess little value. 



94 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



APPENDIX. 

[Containing the story medicm according to Ar (1-228), with a tabulation 
of the corresponding lines in A, E, B, C, F.'\ 

Hys comaundement ];ei dide be-lyve. 152a. 

])'due wex ];ei? moche^ stry ve 

Be-tuen kynge and baron, 

ffor ]>e Emperoi^r wold scle his son, 
5 ])e Emperour hym nold save. 

He lete a-none to spoile |?at knaue, 

And with scourges hys body swynge ; 

To foul detbe thei wold hym brynge. 

A-none after that, god it wote,^ 
10 He bade hem to hange hym fote bote. 

With scourges ];ei dide hym swynge, 

To foull de]}e )?ei wold hym brynge. 

He was lade for];e with-oute pite 

J^orouj-oute all J^at fai? cite ; 
15 )7ei? be-gan a rewfull cry 

Of many gentyll lady. 

All )7e folke oute of Rome 

A-jeyne ]7at gentyll child come. 

Waleway, )?ei saide, with wronge 
20 Schall ]>\s child nowe be honge. 

Ryjt a-mydward )?at ilke pres 

Come rydynge Maxilles, 

And he sawe j^at rewfull cas ; 

Hys second maste?' forsoJ>e he was 
26 Hys scole? to helpe and to rede 

All ]>e folke to hym )?ei bede ; 

A-none to court he gan ryde, 

And with ])e Empe?-our in reson chide 

ffonde to let )?e Emperoi^r wronge 
30 );at his son be noujt an-hange. 

^This line is repeated after 1. 12, but is erased. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 95 

Swyl^e fast fro J?e folke he rode, — 

His palfray a-none to ]>e paleys glode : 

]>o come he by-fo? ]>e Emperoitr, 

And grete hym fai? with honour. 
35 ]>e em-perow by hym styll stode, 

And by-helde hym with steren mode 

he saide to hym, " master, )7ou haue 

]>e cors of god for techyng of J^is knaue. 

je haue by-nome my sone his speeh ; 
40 J^e devyll of hell I J^e be-tech, 

Thyn felows and )?ou be my swye? ! 152b. 

je schull haue lytyll hye?." 

" O Syr Emperowr, knyjt of prys. 

In dedes )7ou schold be wa? and wyse. 
45 It is no wysdome no lyuys hale 

To by-leue no womans tale. 

Mo? to harme J>ane to note 

A womans bolt is son schote. 

ffor jef ];ou sclest hym, I be-sech 
50 On ]>[ heued fall );at ilke wrech 

]>2it fell on Ypocras, ];e good clerk, 

];at sclewe his scole? J^orouj fals werk." 

*' Master, I pray ]7e, tell ];at cas 

Of y&t clerke Ypocras.'' 
55 " Sy?, )?is tale is noujt lyte ; 

ffor jef l^ou wyllt jef ])y son respyt, 

A-for to-morowe day lyjt, 

I wyll ])e tell a-none ryjt, 

A-jenst ye lawe, with grete wowe, 
60 How. Ypocras his nefew sclowe." 

" I jeue hym respyt," said ]>e Empe?*our, 

And saide anone with-oute soiou?, 

Mon schold a-jeyne feeche his son. 

And put hym in-to pi-eson. 
65 ]?e chyld was broujt oute of ]}e ton 

With well grete procession. 



,.g, 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

]>o he cam to ]?at hall, 

He a-loutede pe barons all ; 

And in to prison y-put he was. 
70 Now tell we for];e of Ypocras. 

lyi?," saide Maxillas, "paramour, 

Ypocras was a clerke of grete honnour ; 

Of lechcraft was none his pe? 

Neuer jit in ];is londe he?. 
76 He hade with hym his uefewe 

)7at he schold leren of his vertue. 

He saw ];at child comyng of lo?, 

J^at he nold tech hym no mo? ; 

ffor he l^oujt, and saide also, 
80 )mt he in lo? wold to-fo? hym go. 

]}e childe perseuyd full well, I-wis, 

And hid it full wele in he?'t his. 

His nefys herte he gan a-spye, 152c. 

When he couj^e all ])e mastrye. 
85 Ypocras gins understonde, 

j^orouj werkes of ]>e childes honde, 

l^at he cou}>e all his mastrye. 

He ba? to hym grete envye. 

Sy by-fell apon a |^ynge, 
90 Of hongre );at ilke kynge, 

Hade seke a son gente ; 

To Ypocras a messenge? sente, 

);at he schold come his son to hele. 

And haue he schold of gold full a male, 
95 Ipocras wend ne myjt ; 

He clepyd his nefewe anone ryjt. 

And bade hym wende to l^at londe. 

To nyme ])[\t chylde under honde ; 

And whane he hade so i-do, 
100 He schold come ajeyne hym to. 

])e child was set on a palfray, 

And rode hym for);e on his way. 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 97 

]}0 he to ]>e kynge came 

p>e kynge hym by }>e honde name, 
105 And lade hym to |^e seke childe. 

Ihesus cry St to us be mylde ! 

]>at jonge man sawe ]>e childes payne, 

He tastes his armes and his veyne; 

He asked an urynall, as I wene, 
110 And schewed ];at uryn kenge and qwen, 

Of ])e childe all god it wyt, 

And saide it was mys-by-get. 

He gan );e qwene on side drawe, 

And saide, " dame, a-knawe, 
115 What man ha];e by-gete ])is childe?" 

" Bel amy," scho sayde, " art pou wylde ? 

Who schold bot ])e kynge ? " 

" Dame, say |;oii for no l^ynge, 

He was neue? of kyngges streen." 
120 ^'Lat," scho saide, '^soch wordes ben; — 

Or I schall do ];e bete so, 

])3Lt );ou schalt ueuer ryde no? go." 

" Dame," he saide, " with soch tale, 

]>y childe schall neue? be hale. 
125 Tell me, dame, all ];at cas, 

How ])e childe by-gete was." 

" Bel amy, saist );ou so ? " 

"Sertes, dame," he saide, ''no." 152d. 

He schoke his hede upo7i j^e qwene, 
130 And saide, '^ J'ouj ];ou do me to-scleyne, 

May I noujt do ];y childe bote, 

Bot je me tell hede and rote, 

Of what man he was be-geten." 

'* No man," scho saide, '' may it weten ; 
135 ffor jef my counsel 11 we? un-hele, 

I schold be sclowe witA i-yjt sky 11." 

" Dame," he saide, '' so mot I the, 

No man schall it wyt for me." 



98 KIIXIS CAMPBELL. 

" Syr/^ scho saide, " it so by-fell, 
140 ]}\s o];er day in Auerell, 

]>e kynge of nauerne come to ):>is );ede, 

On fai? hors and in rich wede, 

With my lord for to play, 

And so he dide many a day. 
145 I gan hym son in herte to loue, 

Ouer all J'ynge so god aboue ; 

So J>at for grete drewrye, 

I late ])e kynge be me lye ; 

So it was on me by -gate : 
150 Sy?, late no man ])at i-wete." 

" Nay, madame, for so];e, i-wys, 

Bot for ];at childe was gete a-mys, 

He mot both drynke and ete 

Contrarious drynke and contrarious mete, 
155 ffresch beef and drynke ])e broj^e." 

He jaf a-none J>e child forso];e. 

])e childe was heled fai? and wele. 

\>e kynge hym jaf many Jewell, 

A wer hors i-charged with siluer and gold, 
160 Als moch as he nyme wold. 

He dide hym for);e a-none ryjt, 

And come home in j^at nyjt. 

)?e master hym asked jef he we? sond 

" ja si?," he saide, '^ be seynt Symond ! " 
165 ]}0 asked he, '^ what was his medecyne?" 

He saide, " fresch beef good and fyne " 

"];an was he a nauetroll." 

" ];ou saist so|^e, be my poll ! " 

" O/' q?6od Ypocras, '' be goddes dome ! 
170 ]^ou art by-come a good grome.'' 

]>o by-gan Ypocras to |?ench 

To scle his nefewe with some wrench, 

];ei?-afte?, ]>e j^ride day, 153a. 

With his nefew he went to play, 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 99 

175 Yn-to a fai? grene gardyn ; 

}>ei? wex many an erbe fyn. 

]?e childe sawe an erbe on );e grounde, 

)?at was myjty of mochell monde ; 

He toke it and schewed to Ypocras, 
180 Bot he saide a better ];ei? was ; 

For he wold J^at child be-cach. 

He stoupyd soch on to rech. 

]>o fyle Ypocras with a knyf, 

He nome his nefewe of his lyf. 
185 He dide hym bury unkonnynglych, 

As he had dyed sodeynlych, 

And afte?-warde, swy];e jerne, 

He dide his bokes all to-bryne. 

God of heuen, pe hyje kynge, 
190 ]^at is oue?-sea? of all l^ynge, 

Sende Ypocras for his tresou, 

]>e foul rankkeland menyson. 

Ypocras wyst wele, for his quede, 

l^at he schold son be dede ; 
195 Bot for no l^^nge ])at he cou]^e ];ynch 

]>e menyson he no myjt quench. 

A nempty ton he dide for|;e fett, 

And full of clene wate/- he it pyt, 

Also full to l^e mou];e ; 
200 ffor he wold it we? cou);e, 

And dide after sende mochell and lyte, 

NejboiiJ's hym to bysyte. 

He saide to-fore hem eue?'chon 

];at ])e dep was hym apon, 
205 All W2t/i ryjt and noujt with wouje, 

ffor his nefewe ];at he sclowje. 

])2Lt treson he gan hym reherce. 

On ];e tone a C. holes he gan perce. 

When ])e holes we? mad so fell, 
210 He dide hem stoj)e with dosell, 



100 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

And saide to hem once or tweye, 

"je schall see of my mastrye." 

He sraered ])e dosells all a-boute, 

And made heme after- ward drawen oute. 
215 A dro];e ];ei?-of oute ne came; 

];a?-of merveiled many man. 

Ypocras saide, " water y can stope, 

);at it ne may une];es drope; 153b. 

But y ne may stope my menyson. 
220 All it is for ])at foul treson, 

]>SLt y my nefewe sclewe vylengly, 

ffor he was wyse? man ];ane y. 

I no? no man unde? son 

jeue me helpe ne can, — 
225 Bot my nefewe o-lyue we?. 

Ryjt it is ];at y mys-fai?. 

To soffre wo it is sky 11 

fPor y sclouj my lyuys hele.^' 

Table of Corresponding Lines.^ 

Ar A E B C F 

949 933 1041 

950 934 1042 

951 1043 

952 1044 

5 953 (1045) 

954 (1046) 

955 (1047) 

956 (1048) 

(957) (1436) 

10 (958) (1438) 

959 (1051) 

*An identical line is indicated by an asterisk (*), an omission by a dash 

( ), an addition by brackets ([]), a corresponding but not similar line 

by leaders ( ), and altered rimes by j)arenthet;es (). 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 101 

Ar A E B C F 

960 (1052) 

961 942 1054 

962 941 1053 

15 963 943 1057 

964 944 1058 

965 945 

966 946 

967 947 

20 968 948 



963 969 949 1059 

964 970 950 1060 

966 972 952 1062 1440 

965 971 951 1061 1441 
25 974 

973 

(967) 976 957* (1065) 

(968) 975 958 

977 959 

30 978 960 

979 (961) 

980 (962) 

969 981 963 1067 (1442) 

970 982 964 1068 (1443) 
35 (971) 983 965 (1069) (1444) 

(972) 984 966 (1070) (1445) 

(973) 985 967 1071 (1446) 

(974) 986 968 1072 (1447) 
[87-88] [69-70] [48-49] 

(975) 989* 971 1450 

40 990 972 1451* 

991 (973) (1073) (1452) 

(976) 992 (974) (1074) (1453) 

(977) 993 975 1454* 

(978) 994 976 1455* 

[79-88] 



102 





KILl.IS 


CAMPBELL. 


A 


E 


B 


989 


995 


(977) 


990 


996 


(978) 


992 






991 






(993) 





979 


(994) 




980 


995 




981 


996 




982 


997 


997 


983 


998 


998 


984 


999 


1001 


985 


1000 


1002 


986 


1001 


1003 


(987) 


1002 


1004 


(988) 


1003 


1005 




1004* 


1006 




1005 


1007 


989 


1006 


1008 


990 


1007* 


1009 


(991) 


1008 


1010 


(992) 


1009 




993 


1010 




994 




1011 


995 




1012 


996* 


1011 


1013 


997 


1012 


1014 


998 




1017 


999 




1018 


1000* 


1014* 


1019* 


1001* 


1013 


1020 


1002 


1015* 


(1021) 


1003* 


1016 


(1022; 


1004 


1017 


1023 


1005 


1018 


1024 


1006* 



Ar A E B C F 

45 989 995 (977) 1456 

- 1457 

1459* 

1458 

1460 

50 (994) 980 (1085) 1461 

(1086) 1462 

(1087) 1463 

(1088) 1464 
1465 

55 999 1001 985 (1466) 

(1091) (1467) 
1468 

1469 

1470 

60 1004* 1006 (1093) 1471 

(1094) 1472* 

1473 

1095 1474 

1096 1475 
65 1009 993 1476 

1477 
1478 
1479 

1480* 

70 1012 1014 998 1481 

1101 1482 

1102 1483 

(1103) 1484* 

(1104) 1485 
75 1015* (1021) 1003* 1105 1486 

1106 1487 
[1107-8] 

1109 1488 

1110 1489* 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 103 



Ar A 


E 


B 


C 


F 


(1019) 




(1007) 


- (1111) 


(1490) 


80 (1020) 




(1008) 


(1112) 


(1491) 


1021 


1025 


1009 


(1113) 


1492 


1022 


1026 


1010 


(1114) 


1493 


1023 


1027 


1011 


1116 


1494 


1024 


1028 


1012 


1115 


1495 


85 1025 


1029 


1013 




1496 


1026 


1030 


1014* 




1497 


1027 


1031 


1015* 




1498* 


1028 


1032 


1016 




1499 


1029 


1033 


1017 


1117 


1500 


90 1030 


1034 


1018 


1118 


1501 


1031 


1035 


1019 


(1119) 


1502* 


1032 


1036 


1020 


(1120) 


1503 


1033 


(1037) 


1021* 


1121 


1504* 


1034 


(1038) 


1022 


1122 


1505 


95 1035 


1039 


(1023) 


(1123) 


1506 


1036 


1040 


(1024) 


(1124) 


1507 


1037* 


1041 


1025 


1125 


1508* 


1038 


1042 


1026 


1126 


1509 


1039* 


1043* 


1027* 




1510* 


100 1040 


1044 


1028 




1511 


1041* 


1045 


1029* 


1129 


1512* 


(1042) 


1046 


1030 


1130 


1513 


(1043) 


1047 


1031 


(1131) 


1514 


1044 


1048* 


1032 


(1132) 


1515* 


105 1045 


1049* 


1033* 


1133 


1516* 


1046 


1050 


1034 


1134 


1517 


1047 


1051 


(1035) 


1135 


1519 


1048 


1052 


(1036) 


1136 


1518 


1049 


1053 


1037 


(1137) 


1520 


110 1050 


1054 


1038 


(1138) 


1521 


1051 


1055 


1039 




(1522) 


1052 


1056 


1040 





(1523) 



[41-42] 



104 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 

At 



115 



120 



125 



130 



135 



140 



145 



A 


E 


B 


G 


F 


1053 


1057 


(1041) 


(1143) 


(1524) 


1054 


1058 


(1042) 


(1144) 


(1525) 


1055* 


1059 


1043 


(1145) 


(1526) 


1056 


1060 


1044 


(1146) 


(1527) 


1057 


1061 


1045 


1147 


1528 


1058 


1062 


1046 


1148 


1529 


1059* 


1063 


1047 


1149 


1530 


1060* 


1064 


1048 


1150 


1531 


1061* 


1065 


1049 


1151 


1532 


1062* 


1066 


1050 


1152* 


1533* 


1063 


(1067) 


1051 


(1153) 




1064 


(1068) 


1052 


(1154) 




1065 


1069 


1053* 


1155 




1066* 


1070* 


1054* 


1156 




1067 


1071 




1157 





1068 


1072* 




1158 




1069 


1073* 






1534 


1070 


1074 






1535 


1071 


1075 


1055 


1159 


1536 


1072 


1076 


1056 


1160 


1537 


1073* 


1077 


1057* 


(1161) 


1538* 


1074 


1078 


1058 
[59-60] 


(1162) 


1539 


1075 


(1079) 


(1061) 


(1163) 


(1540) 


1076 


(1080) 


(1062) 


(1164) 


(1541) 


1077* 


1081 


1063 


1165 


(1542) 


1078 


1082 


1064 


1166 


(1543) 


1079 


1083 


1065 


1167 


1544 


1080 


1084 


1066 


1168 


1545 


1081 


1085 


1067 


1169 


(1546) 


1082 


1086 


1068 


1170 


(1547) 


1083* 


1087 


1069* 


1171 


1548* 


1084* 


1088 


1070 


1172 


1549 


1085 


1089 


1071 


1173 


1550 


1086 


1090 


1072 


1174 


1551 



THE SEVEN SA.GES. 



105 



Ar 



150 



155 



160 



165 



170 



175 



A 


E 


B 


C 


F 


1087 


1091 


1073 


1175 


1552 


a088 


1092 


1074 


1176 


1553 


1089 


1093 


1075 


1177 


1554 


1090 


1094* 


1076 


1178 


1555 
[56-59] 


1091 


1095 


1077 


(1179) 


1560 


1092 


1096 


1078 


(1180) 


1561 


1093* 


1097 


1079* 


1181 


1562* 


1094 


1098* 


1080 


1182 


1563* 


1095 


(1099) 


1081 


1183 


1564 


1096 


(1100) 


1082 


1184 
[85-90] 


1565 


1097 


1101 


1083 


1191 


1566 


1098 


1102 


1084 


1192 


1567 


1099 


1103 


1085 


1193 


1568 


1100* 


1104 


1086 


1194 


1569 


1101 


(1105) 


(1087) 


(1195) 


1570 


1102 


(1106) 


(1088) 


(1196) 


1571 


1103 


1107 


1089 


(1197) 


(1572) 


1104* 


1108* 


1090 


(1198) 


(1573) 


1105 


1109 


1091 


1199 


1574 


1106 


1110 


1092 


1200 


1575 


1107 


1111* 


1093* 


(1201) 


(1576) 


1108 


1112 


1094 


(1202) 


(1577) 


1109 


1113* 


1095 


1203 


1578 


1110 


1114 


1096 


1204 


1579 


(1111) 


(1115) 


(1097) 


(1205) 


(1580) 


(1112) 


(1116) 


(1098) 


(1206) 


(1581) 


1113 


1117 


1099 


1-207 


1582 


1114 


1118 


1100* 


1208 


1583 


1115 


1119* 


1101 


(1209) 


1584* 


1116 


1120 


1102 


(1210) 


1585 


1117 


1121 


1103 


(1211) 


(1586) 


1118 


1122 


1104 


(1212) 


(1587) 


1119 


1123 


1105 


1213 


1588 



106 KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



At 


A 


E 


B 


C 


F 


180 


1120 


1124 


1106 


1214 


1589 




1121 


1125 


1107 


(1215) 


(1590) 




1122 


1126 


1108 


(1216) 
[17-20] 


(1591) 
[92-93] 




1123 


1127 


1109 


(1221) 


1594 




1124 


1128 


1110 


(1222) 


1595 


185 


1125 


1129 


1111 


1223 


1596 




1126 


1130 


1112 


1224 


1597 




1127 


(1131) 






(1598) 




1128 


(1132) 






(1599) 




1129 


1133 


1113 


1225 


1600 


190 


1130 


1134 


1114 


1226 


1601 




1131 


1135* 


1115* 


1227 


1602* 




1132 


1136 


1116 


1228 


1603 




1133 


1137 


1117 


(1229) 






1134* 


1138* 


1118 


(1230) 




196 


1135 


1139 


1119 


1231 






1136 


1140* 


1120 


1232 






[cf. 1142] 






[33-34] 






1143 


(1141) 


1121 


1235 


1604 




1144 


(1142) 


1122 


1236 


1605 




1145 


1143 


1123 




1606 


200 


1146 


1144 


1124 




1607 




1137 


1145 


(1125) 


(1237) 


1608 




1138 


1146 


(1126) 


(1238) 


1609 




1139 


1147* 


1127 


1239 


1610 




1140 


1148 


1128 


1240 


1611 


205 


1141 


1149 


(1129) 


(1241) 


(1612) 




1142* 


1150 


(1130) 


(1242) 


(1613) 




[cf. 1136] 












1147 


1151 


1131 




1614 




1148 


1152 


1132 




1615 




1149 


1153 


1133 


1243 


1616 


210 


1150 


1154 
1155* 


1134 
1135* 


1244 


1617 



THE SEVEN SAGES. 107 



Ar 



215 



220 



225 



A 


E 
1156 


B 
1136 


C 


F 


1151 


1157 


1137* 


1245 


1618* 


1152 


1158 


1138 


1246 


1619 


1153 


1159* 


1139 


1247 


1620 


1154 


1160 


1140* 


1248 


1621 


1155 


1161 


1141 


(1249) 


1622 


1156 


1162 


1142 


(1250) 


1623 


1157 


1163 


1143 


1251 


1624* 


1158 


1164 


1144 


1252 


1625 


[59-60] 






[53-54] 




1161 


1165 


1145 


1255 


1626 


1162* 


1166 


1146 


1256 


1627 


1163* 


1167 


1147 




1628 


1164 


1168 


1148 




1629 


1165* 


1169 


1149* 


1257 


1630 


1166 


1170 
(1172) 
(1171) 


1150 


1258 


1631 



This partial table will serve to illustrate the correspondences 
between the various members of group Y. The array of 
figures may look repellent, but I have preferred to submit 
the tabulation for an entire story rather than to give only a 
part of it, or to resort to any printer's devices to compress it, 
and thereby incur the risk of impairing its value. 

KiLLis Campbell. 



LIKE. 



I was born June 11, 1872, at Enfield, King William Co., Va. 
My early training was acquired in the public schools of my native 
township. In the fall of 1888 I entered William and Mary Col- 
lege, where I remained for two sessions. Securing a Peabody 
scholarship at the University of Nashville in 1890, 1 entered that 
institution, where I remained for two years, and was graduated in 
1892 with the degree B. L. In the fall of 1893 I returned to 
William and Mary College, and received there in June, 1894, the 
degree B. A. In October of the same year I entered Johns Hop- 
kins University, where I have studied for four academic years, 
pursuing courses under Professors Bright and Browne in English, 
Professor Wood and Dr. Learned in German, and Drs. Menger, 
Marden, and Rambeau in French, and holding during the session 
1897-98 a fellowship in English. 

I take this occasion to acknowledge my obligations to all my 
instructors, and in particular, to Professor Bright, to whom I am 
deeply indebted both for guidance and encouragement in my 
academic work and for much valuable assistance in the prepara- 
tion of this study. I wish also to thank the authorities in the 
British Museum, Balliol College, and Cambridge University 
Libraries (especially Mr. Bickley of the British Museum) for 
courtesies extended, and for valuable suggestions and informa- 
tion concerning the Middle English manuscripts of the Seven Sages. 



KILLIS CAMPBELL. 



Johns Hopkins University, 
May 1, 1898. 



LB Agio 



A STUDY OF THE ROMANCE OF THE SEVEN SAGES 

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MIDDLE 

ENGLISH VERSIONS 



A DISSERTATION 

PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 

OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 

DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 



KILLlb _. MPBELL 

FORMERLY FELLOW IN ENGLLSH AT THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 



BALTIMORE 

The Modern Language Association of America 
1898 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Sept. 2007 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



